American Federation of Government Employees, Local 225 (Union) and Army Armament Research and Development Command, Dover, New Jersey (Agency)
[ v04 p148 ]
04:0148(24)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
4 FLRA No. 24
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 225
Union
and
U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND,
DOVER, N.J.
Agency
Case No. O-NG-88
DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
THIS CASE COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (THE
AUTHORITY) PURSUANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE), 5 U.S.C. 7101.
UNION PROPOSAL
ALL PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION SHALL BE ON DUTY
TIME.
QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY
THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH
SECTION 7131(B) AND (D) OF THE STATUTE AND, THEREFORE, IS NOT WITHIN THE
DUTY TO BARGAIN, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY.
OPINION
CONCLUSION: THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH SECTION 7131 OF THE
STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S
RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2424.10), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION THAT THE
DISPUTED PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IS SET ASIDE. /1/
REASONS: AS EXPLAINED BY THE PARTIES, THE PROPOSAL HERE IN DISPUTE,
WHICH WOULD PROVIDE THAT THE UNION REPRESENTATIVES' PREPARATION OF
PROPOSALS AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION MATTERS WILL BE CONDUCTED ON OFFICIAL
TIME, BEARS NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE FROM THE PROPOSALS WHICH WERE BEFORE
THE AUTHORITY FOR DECISION IN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1692 AND HEADQUARTERS, 323RD FLYING WING
(ATC), MATHER AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. O-NG-183, 3 FLRA NO.
47(MAY 30, 1980), AND FEDERAL UNIFORMED FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL F-169 AND
U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT COMMAND, DOVER, NEW JERSEY,
CASE NO. 0-NG-73, 3 FLRA NO. 49 (MAY 30, 1980) AND HELD TO BE WITHIN THE
DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE.
IN THOSE CASES, THE AUTHORITY HELD THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSALS FOR
THE USE OF OFFICIAL TIME BY UNION REPRESENTATIVES TO PREPARE FOR
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION CONCERNED A MATTER WHICH
FALLS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7131(D) OF THE STATUTE,
RATHER THAN A MATTER WHICH IS EXCEPTED FROM THE DUTY TO BARGAIN AS
"INTERNAL BUSINESS OF A LABOR ORGANIZATION" UNDER SECTION 7131(B). IN
REACHING ITS DECISION, THE AUTHORITY DID NOT RULE ON THE QUESTION OF
WHAT ACTIVITIES WOULD PROPERLY CONSTITUTE "PREPARATIONS" UNDER THE
OFFICIAL TIME PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE.
THEREFORE, BASED ON THE REASONS SET FORTH IN GREATER DETAIL IN THE
MATHER AIR FORCE BASE CASE, THE PROPOSAL HERE IN DISPUTE MUST ALSO BE
HELD TO BE WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN.
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPTEMBER 4, 1980
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
COPIES OF THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
AUTHORITY IN THE SUBJECT PROCEEDING HAVE THIS DAY BEEN MAILED TO THE
PARTIES LISTED:
MR. RONALD D. KING
DIRECTOR
CONTRACT & APPEALS DIVISION
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
1325 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, NW.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005
MR. W. J. SCHRADER
CHIEF
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF
FOR PERSONNEL
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ROOM 2C655, THE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20310
DR. CAROLYN A. L. WESTERDAHL
PRESIDENT
LOCAL 1437
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
BUILDING 30, ARRADCOM
DOVER, NEW JERSEY 07801
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ IN SO DECIDING THAT THE PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN,
THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO JUDGMENT AS TO THE MATTERS OF THE PROPOSAL.