Please note that Friday, January 20, 2017, is a federal holiday for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.  The following FLRA offices will not be open to accept in-person case filings or to respond to phone calls on that day:  the Authority’s Case Intake and Publication Office, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the Washington Regional Office, and the Federal Service Impasses Panel.  The FLRA’s eFiling System remains available.         

Federal Union of Scientists and Engineers, National Association of Government Employees, Local R1-144 (Union) and Department of the Navy (Activity)



[ v06 p14 ]
06:0014(6)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 6 FLRA No. 6
 
 FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND
 ENGINEERS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-144
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-431
 
                          ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
 
    ON FEBRUARY 9, 1981, THE FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS,
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (THE UNION) FILED A
 PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE AUTHORITY IN THE ABOVE-ENTITLED CASE
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.1 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5
 C.F.R. 2424.1(1980)) AND SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
 LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7101 ET SEQ.).  FOR THE
 REASONS INDICATED BELOW, THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW MUST BE
 DISMISSED.
 
    AS PRESENTED IN THE UNION'S APPEAL, THE ESSENCE OF THE PARTIES
 DISPUTE INVOLVES THE UNION'S REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE THE IMPACT ON
 REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES OF THE ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE TRAINING BEING
 PROVIDED TO SUPERVISORS.  IT APPEARS, HOWEVER, THAT THE UNION HAS NOT
 PROPOSED SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR NEGOTIATION.  WITHOUT SUCH LANGUAGE, IT
 IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE THE CONSISTENCY OF A PROPOSAL WITH LAWS,
 REGULATIONS OR THE STATUTE.  THUS, THE INSTANT MATTER IN DISPUTE IS NOT
 SUFFICIENTLY DELINEATED SUCH AS TO PROVIDE A BASIS FOR A NEGOTIABILITY
 DETERMINATION.  IN THIS REGARD, IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT A PETITION
 FOR REVIEW OF A NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE WHICH DOES NOT PRESENT A PROPOSAL
 SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND DELIMITED IN FORM AND CONTENT AS TO PERMIT THE
 AUTHORITY TO RENDER A NEGOTIABILITY DECISION THEREON DOES NOT MEET THE
 CONDITIONS FOR REVIEW SET FORTH IN SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE AND
 SECTION 2424.1 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.  ASSOCIATION OF
 CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, ALABAMA ACT AND STATE OF ALABAMA NATIONAL GUARD,
 CASE NO. O-NG-27, 2 FLRA NO. 39(1979).
 
    IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE PROPOSAL IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND
 DELIMITED IN FORM AND CONTENT AT THIS TIME TO PERMIT THE AUTHORITY TO
 RENDER A NEGOTIABILITY DECISION.
 
    ACCORDINGLY, FOR THE REASONS STATED HEREIN, AND APART FROM OTHER
 CONSIDERATIONS,
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE INSTANT APPEAL BE, AND IT HEREBY IS,
 DISMISSED.
 
    FOR THE AUTHORITY.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JUNE 3, 1981
 
                   JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR