U.S. Army, U.S. Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command, Warren, Michigan (Respondent) and Local 1658, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (Charging Party) 

 7 FLRA No. 30
 
 U.S. ARMY, U.S. ARMY
 MATERIEL DEVELOPMENT
 AND READINESS COMMAND,
 WARREN, MICHIGAN
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 LOCAL 1658, AMERICAN FEDERATION
 OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 5-CA-422
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE REGIONAL
 DIRECTOR'S "ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY" IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2429.1(A) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES
 AND REGULATIONS.
 
    UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING THE
 PARTIES' STIPULATION OF FACTS, ACCOMPANYING EXHIBITS, AND BRIEFS
 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL, THE AUTHORITY
 FINDS:
 
    FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE) IN JANUARY 1979, THE RESPONDENT
 INITIATED A NEW PROCEDURE, IN VIEW OF SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE,
 /1/ BY WHICH DUES DEDUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS COULD BE REVOKED.  THIS
 PROCEDURE PERMITS EMPLOYEES TO REVOKE PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED DUES
 WITHHOLDINGS AT ANY TIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 1, 1979, OR 1 YEAR FROM THE
 DATE OF THE INITIAL AUTHORIZATION, WHICHEVER IS LATER.  THE GENERAL
 COUNSEL CONTENDS THAT IN IMPLEMENTING THIS PROCEDURE, THE RESPONDENT HAS
 FAILED TO MEET ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION 7115(A) AND HAS MADE A
 UNILATERAL CHANGE IN CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT CONSULTING OR
 NEGOTIATING WITH THE UNION, IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 7116(A)(8), (5) AND
 (1), RESPECTIVELY, OF THE STATUTE.
 
    THE STIPULATED FACTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:  ON JANUARY 11, 1977, THE
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1658 (UNION), WAS
 CERTIFIED AS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF A CONSOLIDATED UNIT
 CONSISTING OF ALL NONPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES LOCATED AT CERTAIN OF THE
 RESPONDENT'S FACILITIES.  ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1977, THE UNION AND THE
 RESPONDENT ENTERED INTO A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WHICH
 PROVIDED, INTER ALIA, FOR THE TERMINATION OF AUTHORIZED DUES ALLOTMENTS
 AT STATED 6-MONTH INTERVALS UPON RECEIPT OF A WRITTEN REVOCATION.  /2/
 
    ON AUGUST 20, 1979, AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE STATUTE, BOTH THE
 UNION AND THE RESPONDENT UNDERSTOOD THAT THE CONTRACTUAL PROVISION
 REFERRING TO DUES ALLOTMENTS HAD BEEN SUPERSEDED BY SECTION 7115(A).
 THIS UNDERSTANDING WAS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE ISSUANCE BY THE AUTHORITY OF
 A POLICY STATEMENT /3/ WHICH ADDRESSED THE IMPACT OF SECTION 7115(A) ON
 DUES ASSIGNMENTS IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME THE STATUTE BECAME EFFECTIVE.
 IN PERTINENT PART, THE AUTHORITY STATED THAT WITH REGARD TO SUCH
 ASSIGNMENTS THE 1-YEAR PERIOD REFERRED TO IN SECTION 7115(A) SHALL RUN
 FROM EITHER THE "ENDING DATE OF THE PRECEDING SIX-MONTH INTERVAL DURING
 WHICH THE EMPLOYEE COULD HAVE REVOKED HIS OR HER DUES AUTHORIZATION . .
 . OR THE DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE AUTHORIZED DUES WITHHOLDING,"
 WHICHEVER IS LATER.  IN OCTOBER 1979, THE RESPONDENT ISSUED "DESK
 PROCEDURE NO. 1" WHICH SET FORTH THE PROCEDURE AT ISSUE HEREIN FOR
 TERMINATING DUES ALLOTMENTS.  AT THE TIME THIS CASE WAS BROUGHT,
 APPROXIMATELY 80 EMPLOYEES HAD REVOKED THEIR DUES ASSIGNMENTS.
 
                         FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
 
    THE RESPONDENT'S PROCEDURE FOR THE TERMINATION OF DUES ASSIGNMENTS
 STEMS FROM ITS INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF THE PORTION OF SECTION
 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE WHICH STATES THAT "ANY SUCH ASSIGNMENT MAY NOT BE
 REVOKED FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR." THE RESPONDENT ASSERTS THAT THIS MEANS
 A DUES ASSIGNMENT IS IRREVOCABLE FOR 1 YEAR BUT THEREAFTER MAY BE
 REVOKED AT WILL AND THAT ITS "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1," WHICH PERMITS DUES
 REVOCATION AT ANY TIME AFTER SEPTEMBER 1, 1979, OR AT ANY TIME AFTER THE
 ANNIVERSARY DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE AUTHORIZED DUES WITHHOLDING, THUS
 CONFORMS TO THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE.  THE POSITION OF THE
 GENERAL COUNSEL, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS THAT DUES AUTHORIZATIONS ARE
 REVOCABLE ONLY A 1-YEAR INTERVALS UNDER THE STATUTE, AND THAT BY
 PERMITTING EMPLOYEES TO REVOKE THEIR DUES ASSIGNMENTS AT ANY TIME
 FOLLOWING A 1-YEAR PERIOD, THE RESPONDENT HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH
 SECTION 7115(A) AND HAS INSTITUTED UNILATERAL CHANGES IN CONDITIONS OF
 EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH ITS BARGAINING OBLIGATION.
 
    AS THIS IS A CASE OF FIRST IMPRESSION UNDER THE STATUTE, IT IS
 APPROPRIATE TO EXAMINE THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE "MAT NOT BE REVOKED FOR
 A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR" IN THE CONTEXT OF RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND
 FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS POLICY.
 
    PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF THE STATUTE, PROCEDURES FOR PAYROLL DEDUCTION
 FOR DIRECT PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES' UNION DUES WERE GOVERNED BY SECTION 21
 OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.  SECTION 21 PROVIDED, IN RELEVANT
 PART, THAT WHERE LABOR AND MANAGEMENT AGREED TO A PROCEDURE FOR DUES
 ALLOTMENT, SUCH PROCEDURE WAS SUBJECT TO CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
 REGULATIONS "WHICH SHALL INCLUDE PROVISION FOR THE EMPLOYEE TO REVOKE
 HIS AUTHORIZATION AT STATED SIX-MONTH INTERVALS." ALTHOUGH VOLUNTARY AND
 DEPENDENT UPON A WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES, A DUES
 WITHHOLDING PROVISION OPERATED AS A UNION SECURITY MEASURE DESIGNED TO
 FOSTER STABILITY IN LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS.  /4/
 
    IN CONTRAST TO THE EXECUTIVE ORDER, SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE
 DOES NOT MAKE DUES ASSIGNMENTS DEPENDENT UPON A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
 BETWEEN THE PARTIES BUT RATHER PERMITS AN EMPLOYEE IN AN APPROPRIATE
 UNIT TO AUTHORIZE DUES ALLOTMENTS IF HE SO DESIRES.  THE LEGISLATIVE
 HISTORY OF THE STATUTE REVEALS THAT THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 7115(A) OF
 THE STATUTE IS IDENTICAL TO THAT CONTAINED IN SECTION 7115(A) OF H.R.
 11280 AS PASSED BY THE HOUSE.  /5/ THE LANGUAGE OF THE HOUSE BILL, IN
 TURN, WAS UNCHANGED FROM THAT REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON POST
 OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE.  /6/ THE HOUSE COMMITTEE REPORT STATED THAT
 SECTION 7115 "REFLECTS A COMPROMISE BETWEEN TWO SHARPLY CONTRASTING
 POSITIONS WHICH THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERED:  NO GUARANTEE OF WITHHOLDING
 FOR ANY UNIT EMPLOYEE MANDATORY PAYMENT BY ALL UNIT EMPLOYEES ('AGENCY
 SHOP').  THE COMMITTEE BELIEVES SECTION 7115 TO BE A FAIR RESOLUTION FOR
 AGENCIES, LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, AND EMPLOYEES." /7/ SPECIFICALLY WITH
 RESPECT TO SECTION 7115(A), THE REPORT STATED:  /8/
 
    SUBSECTION (A) PROVIDES THAT IF AN EMPLOYEE IN AN EXCLUSIVELY
 REPRESENTED UNIT PRESENTS TO
 
    THE AGENCY A WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT AUTHORIZING THE AGENCY TO DEDUCT THE
 LABOR ORGANIZATION'S DUES
 
    FROM THE EMPLOYEE'S PAY EACH PAY PERIOD, THE AGENCY MUST HONOR THE
 ASSIGNMENT AND MUST DEDUCT
 
    THE DUES.  THE DECISION TO PAY, OR NOT TO PAY IS SOLELY THE
 EMPLOYEE'S.  IF THE EMPLOYEE
 
    DECIDES TO HAVE DUES WITHHELD, THE AGENCY MUST HONOR THAT DECISION.
 THE ALLOTMENTS ARE TO BE
 
    MADE AT NO COST TO THE EMPLOYEES OR TO THE LABOR ORGANIZATION.
 ASSIGNMENTS NORMALLY ARE TO BE
 
    IRREVOCABLE FOR ONE YEAR.
 
    THE RELEVANT LANGUAGE OF THE BILL REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON
 GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS AND PASSED BY THE SENATE (SECTION 7231(A) OF S.
 2640) PROVIDED THAT ASSIGNMENTS OF DUES ALLOTMENTS "SHALL BE REVOCABLE
 AT STATED INTERVALS OF NOT MORE THAN 6 MONTHS." /9/ THE SENATE COMMITTEE
 STATED THAT THIS PROVISION WAS SIMILAR TO THAT CONTAINED IN EXECUTIVE
 ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.  /10/ THE SENATE PROVISION, UNLIKE THE HOUSE
 PROVISION, MADE THE OBLIGATION OF AN AGENCY TO DEDUCT DUES FROM UNION
 MEMBERS DEPENDENT UPON THE AGENCY'S AGREEMENT TO DO SO AS PART OF A
 NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT.  /11/ ALSO, WITH RESPECT TO THE COST OF MAKING
 DUES ALLOTMENTS, THE SENATE BILL WAS SILENT WHEREAS THE HOUSE BILL
 SPECIFIED THAT THE ALLOTMENT SHALL BE MADE AT NO COST TO THE EXCLUSIVELY
 RECOGNIZED UNION OR THE EMPLOYEE.  THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REJECTED THE
 SENATE PROVISION AND INSTEAD ADOPTED THE HOUSE SECTION UNCHANGED.  /12/
 IN ITS REPORT, THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE DID NOT ADDRESS THE REVOCABILITY
 OF ASSIGNMENTS OF DUES ALLOTMENTS.  /13/
 
    IN THE AUTHORITY'S VIEW, THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 7115(A) OF THE
 STATUTE AND THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY CITED ABOVE SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION
 THAT SECTION 7115(A) IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A MORE EFFECTIVE FORM OF
 UNION SECURITY THAN PREVIOUSLY EXISTED, WITHOUT GOING SO FAR AS TO
 AUTHORIZE AN "AGENCY SHOP." /14/ THIS CONCLUSION IS EVIDENCED BY THE
 LEGISLATED CHANGE FROM A DUES WITHHOLDING PROVISION UNDER THE EXECUTIVE
 ORDER WHICH WAS CONTINGENT UPON A NEGOTIATED WRITTEN AGREEMENT TO A
 STATUTORILY MANDATED PROCEDURE FOR DUES ALLOTMENTS, AS WELL AS BY THE
 FACT THAT UNDER THE STATUTE, UNLIKE UNDER THE ORDER, DUES ALLOTMENTS ARE
 REQUIRED TO BE MADE AT NO COST TO THE UNION.  /15/ IN THE AUTHORITY'S
 VIEW, CONSISTENT WITH THIS CONCLUSION, CONGRESS INTENDED IN SECTION
 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE TO MAINTAIN THE PROCEDURE FOR REVOCATION OF
 ASSIGNMENTS SET FORTH IN THE EXECUTIVE ORDER (I.E., ONLY UPON STATED
 INTERVALS OF TIME), AND TO EXPAND THAT INTERVAL UNDER THE STATUTE TO A
 PERIOD OF ONE YEAR.  THAT IS, THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 7115(A) THAT "ANY
 SUCH ASSIGNMENT MAY NOT BE REVOKED FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR" MUST BE
 INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT AUTHORIZED DUES ALLOTMENTS MAY BE REVOKED ONLY
 AT INTERVALS OF 1 YEAR.  /16/ THE AUTHORITY'S CONCLUSION IN THIS REGARD
 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STATUTORY PURPOSE OF PROVIDING A GREATER MEASURE
 OF UNION SECURITY, THEREBY FOSTERING STABILITY IN LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS.
 
    ACCORDINGLY, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT BY ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR
 REVOCATION OF DUES WITHHOLDING AUTHORIZATIONS CONTRARY TO THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7115(A), THE RESPONDENT HAS VIOLATED SECTION
 7116(A)(8) AND (1) OF THE STATUTE.  /17/
 
                              THE REMEDY /18/
 
    WITH RESPECT TO THE REMEDY, THE AUTHORITY SHALL ORDER THAT THE
 RESPONDENT RESCIND "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1," REINSTATE TO DUES WITHHOLDING
 STATUS THOSE INDIVIDUALS IN THE UNIT WHOSE DUES ASSIGNMENTS WERE
 TERMINATED IMPROPERLY AND WHOSE ASSIGNMENTS HAVE NOT REACHED A DATE
 APPROPRIATE FOR SUCH TERMINATION, AND REIMBURSE THE UNION /19/ IN AN
 AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF DUES IT WOULD HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE
 EMPLOYEES NAMED IN THE ATTACHED APPENDIX BUT DID NOT RECEIVE AS A RESULT
 OF THE RESPONDENT'S IMPLEMENTATION OF A DUES REVOCATION PROCEDURE WHICH
 IS INCONSISTENT WITH SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    PURSUANT TO SECTION 2423.29 OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE
 FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND SECTION 7118 OF THE FEDERAL
 SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT
 THE U.S. ARMY, U.S. ARMY MATERIEL DEVELOPMENT AND READINESS COMMAND,
 WARREN, MICHIGAN SHALL:
 
    1.  CEASE AND DESIST FROM:
 
    (A) HONORING REVOCATIONS FROM BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES OF
 ASSIGNMENTS AUTHORIZING THE DEDUCTION FROM PAY OF THE AMOUNT OF REGULAR
 AND PERIODIC UNION DUES WHICH ARE MADE AT OTHER THAN 1-YEAR INTERVALS.
 /20/
 
    (B) IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER, INTERFERING WITH, RESTRAINING, OR
 COERCING ANY EMPLOYEE IN THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHT ASSURED BY THE
 STATUTE.
 
    2.  TAKE THE FOLLOWING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE
 PURPOSES AND POLICIES OF THE STATUTE:
 
    (A) RESCIND "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1" WHICH SETS FORTH AN IMPROPER
 PROCEDURE FOR REVOCATION OF AUTHORIZED DUES ALLOTMENTS.
 
    (B) REINSTATE TO DUES WITHHOLDING STATUS EVERY BARGAINING UNIT
 EMPLOYEE WHOSE DUES ASSIGNMENT WAS TERMINATED IMPROPERLY BY REASON OF
 "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1" AND WHOSE ASSIGNMENT HAS NOT REACHED A DATE
 APPROPRIATE FOR TERMINATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE.
 
    (C) REIMBURSE THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE, LOCAL 1658, AMERICAN
 FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE
 REGULAR AND PERIODIC DUES IT WOULD HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE PAY OF
 BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES BUT FOR RESPONDENT'S HAVING IMPLEMENTED AN
 IMPROPER DUES REVOCATION PROCEDURE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 7115(A) OF
 THE STATUTE.
 
    (D) POST AT ITS FACILITIES IN WARREN, MICHIGAN, COPIES OF THE
 ATTACHED NOTICE ON FORMS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY.  UPON RECEIPT OF SUCH FORMS THEY SHALL BE SIGNED BY THE
 COMMANDING GENERAL AND SHALL BE POSTED AND MAINTAINED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE
 DAYS THEREAFTER, IN CONSPICUOUS PLACES, INCLUDING BULLETIN BOARDS AND
 OTHER PLACES WHERE NOTICES TO EMPLOYEES ARE CUSTOMARILY POSTED.
 REASONABLE STEPS SHALL BE TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT TO INSURE THAT SUCH
 NOTICES ARE NOT ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER MATERIAL.
 
    (E) PURSUANT TO SECTION 2423.30 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND
 REGULATIONS, NOTIFY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, REGION V, FEDERAL LABOR
 RELATIONS AUTHORITY, IN WRITING, WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS
 ORDER, AS TO WHAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER.
 
    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PORTION OF THE COMPLAINT ALLEGING A
 VIOLATION OF SECTION 7116(A)(5) OF THE STATUTE BE, AND IT HEREBY IS,
 DISMISSED.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., NOVEMBER 12, 1981
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
                       LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
                          NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
 
                                PURSUANT TO
 
                        A DECISION AND ORDER OF THE
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
                AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF
 
                       CHAPTER 71 OF TITLE 5 OF THE
 
                            UNITED STATES CODE
 
                FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
 
                   WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
 
    WE WILL NOT HONOR REVOCATIONS FROM BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES OF
 ASSIGNMENTS AUTHORIZING THE DEDUCTION FROM PAY OF THE AMOUNT OF REGULAR
 AND PERIODIC UNION DUES WHICH ARE MADE AT OTHER THAN 1-YEAR INTERVALS.
 
    WE WILL NOT IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER INTERFERE WITH, RESTRAIN,
 OR COERCE ANY EMPLOYEE IN THE EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHT ASSURED BY THE
 STATUTE.
 
    WE WILL RESCIND "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1" WHICH SETS FORTH AN IMPROPER
 PROCEDURE FOR REVOCATION OF AUTHORIZED DUES ALLOTMENTS.
 
    WE WILL REINSTATE TO DUES WITHHOLDING STATUS EVERY BARGAINING UNIT
 EMPLOYEE WHOSE DUES ASSIGNMENT WERE TERMINATED IMPROPERLY BY REASON OF
 "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1" AND WHOSE ASSIGNMENT HAS NOT REACHED A DATE
 APPROPRIATE FOR TERMINATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE.
 
    WE WILL REIMBURSE THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE, LOCAL 1658, AMERICAN
 FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE
 REGULAR AND PERIODIC DUES IT WOULD HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE PAY OF
 BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES BUT FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN IMPROPER DUES
 REVOCATION PROCEDURE IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 7115(A) OF THE STATUTE.
 
                           (AGENCY OR ACTIVITY)
 
    DATED:  . . .  BY:  (SIGNATURE)
 
    THIS NOTICE MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE
 OF POSTING AND MUST NOT BE ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER
 MATERIAL.
 
    IF ANY EMPLOYEES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE OR
 COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS, THEY MAY COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY
 WITH THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, REGION V, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY,
 WHOSE ADDRESS IS:  SUITE A-1359, 175 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD, CHICAGO, IL
 60604, AND WHOSE TELEPHONE NUMBER IS:  (312) 886-3468.
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
 
 
    /1/ SECTION 7115(A) PROVIDES:
 
    SEC. 7115.  ALLOTMENTS TO REPRESENTATIVES
 
    (A) IF AN AGENCY HAS RECEIVED FROM AN EMPLOYEE IN AN APPROPRIATE UNIT
 A WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT
 
    WHICH AUTHORIZES THE AGENCY TO DEDUCT FROM THE PAY OF THE EMPLOYEE
 AMOUNTS FOR THE PAYMENT OF
 
    REGULAR AND PERIODIC DUES OF THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
 UNIT, THE AGENCY SHALL HONOR
 
    THE ASSIGNMENT AND MAKE AN APPROPRIATE ALLOTMENT PURSUANT TO THE
 ASSIGNMENT.  . . . (A)NY SUCH
 
    ASSIGNMENT MAY NOT BE REVOKED FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEAR.
 
    /2/ ARTICLE IX, SECTION F OF THE NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT PROVIDED:
 
    SECTION F.  ALLOTMENTS WILL BE TERMINATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
 FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
 
   .          .          .          .
 
 
    (4) UPON RECEIPT OF WRITTEN REVOCATION IN THE PAYROLL OFFICE EITHER
 BY 1 MARCH OR 1
 
    SEPTEMBER OF ANY CALENDAR YEAR.  THE ALLOTMENT WILL BE DISCONTINUED
 AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
 
    FIRST FULL PAY PERIOD AFTER 1 MARCH OR 1 SEPTEMBER, AS APPROPRIATE.
 
    /3/ INTERPRETATION AND GUIDANCE, 1 FLRA 183(1979).
 
    /4/ SEE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS IN THE FEDERAL SERVICE (1975), AT
 75.
 
    /5/ LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS STATUTE, TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 1978,
 96TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION, COMMITTEE PRINT NO. 96-7 (NOVEMBER 19,
 1979), AT 974.
 
    /6/ ID. AT 404.
 
    /7/ ID. AT 694.
 
    /8/ ID.  AS STATED IN THE HOUSE COMMITTEE REPORT, THE EXCEPTIONS TO
 THE REQUIREMENT THAT ASSIGNMENTS "NORMALLY ARE TO BE IRREVOCABLE FOR ONE
 YEAR" ARE SET FORTH IN SECTION 7115(B).  ID. AT 695.  THESE EXCEPTIONS
 ARE NOT HERE IN ISSUE.
 
    /9/ ID. AT 539 (REPORTED BY SENATE COMMITTEE) AND 599-600 (PASSED BY
 SENATE).
 
    /10/ ID. AT 772.
 
    /11/ ID. AT 823.
 
    /12/ ID.
 
    /13/ IN THIS REGARD, STATEMENTS MADE DURING THE CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE
 LEADING TO ENACTMENT OF THE STATUTE WHICH DID ADVERT TO THE REVOCABILITY
 LANGUAGE DO NOT SHED LIGHT ON ITS INTENDED MEANING, AS RELEVANT TO THE
 ISSUE HEREIN.  SEE, E.G., STATEMENTS OF CONGRESSMAN ERLENBORN, ID. AT
 879-880, AND CONGRESSMAN COLLINS, ID. AT 907.
 
    /14/ THE AUTHORITY HAS PREVIOUSLY HELD THAT "AGENCY SHOP"
 ARRANGEMENTS ARE PROHIBITED UNDER THE STATUTE.  SERVICE EMPLOYEES
 INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 556 AND DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
 HEADQUARTERS, U.S. ARMY SUPPORT COMMAND, FORT SHAFTER, HAWAII, 1 FLRA
 562(1979).
 
    /15/ UNDER THE ORDER, AN AGENCY COULD CHARGE A UNION A SERVICE FEE
 FOR MAKING PAYROLL DUES DEDUCTIONS FOR THE UNION'S MEMBERS.  THE AMOUNT
 OF THE FEE WAS SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATION BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND THE UNION.
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1749 AND LAUGHLIN AIR
 FORCE BASE, TEXAS, 6 FLRC 525, 535-37(1978).
 
    /16/ CONSISTENT WITH THIS CONCLUSION IS THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT
 GIVING GUIDANCE TO FEDERAL AGENCIES BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, THE
 PREDECESSOR TO THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT:
 
    THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD IS A CHANGE FROM EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491 AND
 IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS,
 
    WHICH TIE DUES WITHHOLDING TO NEGOTIATED
 
    AGREEMENTS AND WHICH ALLOW REVOCATION OF EXISTING ASSIGNMENTS AT
 STATED SIX-MONTH
 
    INTERVALS.  ACCORDINGLY, PARTIES MAY WISH TO NEGOTIATE THE
 ANNIVERSARY DATE FOR THE ONE-YEAR
 
    PERIOD.  ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 11, 1979 (THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
 STATUTE), AGENCIES SHOULD
 
    INFORM EMPLOYEES AFFECTED OF THE ELIMINATION OF THE SEMI-ANNUAL
 REVOCATION PERIODS.  THE
 
    INFORMATION SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT AFTER THE NEXT AVAILABLE SIX-MONTH
 REVOCATION DATE ESTABLISHED
 
    BY THE APPLICABLE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT, ANY FUTURE
 REVOCATION CAN ONLY BE AT
 
    ONE-YEAR INTERVALS FROM THAT DATE . . . .  CSC BULLETIN 711-48,
 SPECIAL BULLETIN #10, AT 4
 
    (DEC. 28, 1978) (ENTITLED "GUIDANCE TO AGENCIES ON ACTIONS TO BE
 TAKEN ON OR BEFORE JANUARY
 
    11,1979, REGARDING LABOR RELATIONS PROVISIONS IN THE CIVIL SERVICE
 REFORM ACT").
 
    /17/ HOWEVER, THE ALLEGATION THAT THE RESPONDENT VIOLATED SECTION
 7116(A)(5) OF THE STATUTE BY CHANGING CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT
 CONSULTING OR NEGOTIATING WITH THE UNION MUST BE DISMISSED.  IN
 IMPLEMENTING "DESK PROCEDURE NO. 1," THE RESPONDENT ATTEMPTED TO COMPLY
 WITH A STATUTORY PROVISION REQUIRING IT AS A MATTER OF LAW TO CHANGE THE
 EXISTING POLICY REGARDING REVOCATION OF DUES ASSIGNMENTS.  THUS,
 ALTHOUGH RESPONDENT'S ATTEMPT TO COMPLY WITH THAT PROVISION WAS
 DEFICIENT, ITS ACTION IN THIS REGARD CARRIED WITH IT NO OBLIGATION,
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 7116(A)(5), TO BARGAIN OVER THE CHANGE.
 
    /18/ THE STIPULATED RECORD SHOWS THAT EACH OF THE 80 EMPLOYEES WHO
 ASKED TO REVOKE A DUES ASSIGNMENT PREVIOUSLY HAD AUTHORIZED DUES
 WITHHOLDING.  IN ITS BRIEF, HOWEVER, RESPONDENT CONTENDS THAT 15 OF THE
 80 ARE NOT IN THE BARGAINING UNIT.  CONSEQUENTLY, SINCE BY ITS EXPRESS
 LANGUAGE SECTION 7115(A) APPLIES ONLY TO WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS "FROM AN
 EMPLOYEE IN AN APPROPRIATE UNIT," THE RESPONDENT ASSERTS THAT WITH
 RESPECT TO THE 15 EMPLOYEES IT COULD NOT HAVE FAILED OR REFUSED TO ALLOT
 DUES TO THE UNION AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 7115(A).  THERE IS NOTHING IN
 THE STIPULATION OF FACTS OR ATTACHED EXHIBITS REGARDING THE STATUS OF
 THE 15 EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN THEIR INCLUSION ON A LIST OF EMPLOYEES WHOSE
 ALLOTMENTS WERE TERMINATED.  THE STATUS OF THESE EMPLOYEES HAS NO EFFECT
 ON A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE RESPONDENT COMMITTED AN UNFAIR
 LABOR PRACTICE IN INSTITUTING ITS NEW PROCEDURE FOR THE TERMINATION OF
 DUES ASSIGNMENTS.  HOWEVER, THE REMEDY WILL APPLY ONLY TO THOSE
 EMPLOYEES WHOSE NAMES APPEAR ON THE LIST AND WHO ARE IN THE BARGAINING
 UNIT.
 
    /19/ SEE DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY, 5 FLRA NO. 21(1981).
 
    /20/ IN THIS REGARD, THE REQUISITE 1-YEAR INTERVALS SHALL BE
 CALCULATED FROM SEPTEMBER 1, 1978 OR THE DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
 AUTHORIZED DUES WITHHOLDING, WHICHEVER IS LATER.  SEE INTERPRETATION AND
 GUIDANCE, SUPRA N. 3, AT 189.