Click here to view the decision.
55 FLRA No. 39
IRS, North Florida District Tampa Field Branch, Tampa, Florida and NTEU, Chapter 87, Case No. AT- CA-70357 (Decided February 26, 1999)
The complaint alleged that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute by refusing to sign or implement a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) negotiated by the parties. The complaint further alleged that the Respondent violated the Statute by refusing to comply with and repudiating the MOU. The Judge found that the Respondent did not violate the Statute because the parties never reached a full agreement. Accordingly, the Judge recommended that the complaint be dismissed.
The Authority adopted the Judge's findings and conclusions. In particular, the Authority noted, that the preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that the parties did not reach agreement on a term of the MOU that both regarded as material. The Judge found that there was an on-going exchange of draft MOUs containing changes in several paragraphs of the MOU and, ultimately, that negotiations over the "signature block" paragraph of the MOU remained unresolved. Consistent with Authority precedent, parties are obligated to execute, upon request, and take necessary steps to implement a written document but only after agreement is reached. The parties did not have a meeting of the minds with respect to the signature block paragraph of the MOU and did not reach agreement on the MOU. Finally, the Authority noted that because it adopted the Judge's conclusion that the parties did not reach a full agreement on the MOU, it did adopt the Judge's further determination that, consistent with the parties' national collective bargaining agreement, the MOU was subject to Agency head approval under section 7114(c) of the Statute. In sum, the Authority found that the Respondent did not violate the Statute.