Local No. 3, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO-CLC (Labor Organization/Petitioner) and Naval Sea Support Center, Atlantic Detachment (Activity)
[ v07 p626 ]
07:0626(99)RO
The decision of the Authority follows:
7 FLRA No. 99
LOCAL NO. 3, INTERNATIONAL
FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL
AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS,
AFL-CIO-CLC
Labor Organization/Petitioner
and
NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER,
ATLANTIC DETACHMENT
Activity
Case No. 2-RO-41
DECISION AND ORDER ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION OF UNIT
UPON A PETITION DULY FILED WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION 7111(B)(1) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE), A HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE A HEARING
OFFICER OF THE AUTHORITY. THE AUTHORITY HAS REVIEWED THE HEARING
OFFICER'S RULINGS MADE AT THE HEARING AND FINDS THAT THEY ARE FREE FROM
PREJUDICIAL ERROR. THE RULINGS ARE HEREBY AFFIRMED.
UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS: LOCAL NO.
3, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS,
AFL-CIO-CLC (UNION), FILED A PETITION SEEKING AN ELECTION IN A UNIT
COMPOSED OF ALL EMPLOYEES AT THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC
DETACHMENT, TRAINING SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT (TSD), WHICH IS LOCATED IN
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. THE TSD IS ONE OF SEVERAL LINE DEPARTMENTS
OF THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC DETACHMENT (ACTIVITY). THE
ACTIVITY CONTENDS THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS INAPPROPRIATE UNDER THE
STATUTE ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE TSD DO NOT SHARE A
COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE
OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY, AND THAT SUCH A UNIT WOULD LEAD
TO UNWARRANTED FRAGMENTATION OF THE ACTIVITY AND WOULD NOT PROMOTE
EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF OPERATIONS. THE ACTIVITY ARGUES
THAT THE ONLY APPROPRIATE UNIT WOULD BE ACTIVITY-WIDE. /1/ THE UNION'S
POSITION THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS APPROPRIATE IS BASED ON ITS GEOGRAPHIC
LOCATION, UNIQUENESS OF FUNCTION AND THE POSITION DESCRIPTIONS OF THE
TSD'S EMPLOYEES.
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT WHICH THE PETITIONER SEEKS TO
REPRESENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION
7112(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE. /2/ THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THE
EMPLOYEES SOUGHT TO BE INCLUDED DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE
COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE
OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS. THUS, EMPLOYEES WHO WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE
PROPOSED UNIT SHARE WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY MANY OF THE
SAME JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME PERSONNEL POLICIES
AND PRACTICES. FURTHER, THERE IS EXTENSIVE INTERCHANGE. THE RECORD
SHOWS THAT 30 RO 40 PERCENT OF THE WORKING TIME OF THE EMPLOYEES SOUGHT
IS SPENT ON TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENTS AWAY FROM TSD AT THE OTHER LINE
DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY. LABOR RELATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY IS
CENTRALIZED IN THE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT AT THE NAVAL WEAPONS
STATION IN YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA; LINE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE LIMITED
AUTHORITY IN PERSONNEL AND DISCIPLINARY MATTERS; AND ACTIVITY
INSTRUCTIONS AND MAJOR PERSONNEL MATTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE OFFICER
IN CHARGE WHO IS ALSO THE ACTIVITY'S EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
OFFICER. HENCE, THE PETITIONER HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT THE EMPLOYEES
IN THE UNIT SOUGHT SHARE TERMS OR CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT SEPARATE AND
DISTINCT FROM OTHER ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES. THUS ANY COMMUNITY OF INTEREST
SEPARATE FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
THE AUTHORITY FURTHER NOTES THAT THE PROPOSED UNIT OF 42 OUT OF 421
ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES WOULD NOT PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS OR EFFICIENCY OF
AGENCY OPERATIONS SINCE IT WOULD RESULT IN " . . . ARTIFICIAL
FRAGMENTATION OF AN INTEGRATED ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT OR SUBDIVISION
OF THE AGENCY ON THE BASIS OF GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION ALONG." U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE, MINNEAPOLIS ADP
FIELD CENTER, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, 5 FLRA NO. 92(1981). FURTHER, AS
PREVIOUSLY STATED, PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES ARE CENTRALLY
ESTABLISHED AND UNIFORMLY IMPLEMENTED FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY.
THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE
UNIT PETITIONED FOR IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER
SECTION 7112(A)(1), AND THE PETITION IS HEREBY DISMISSED.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE PETITION IN CASE NO. 2-RO-41 BE, AND IT
HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 15, 1982
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
/1/ THE UNION STATED AT THE HEARING THAT IT WAS NOT PREPARED TO SAY
IF IT WOULD REPRESENT AN ACTIVITY-WIDE UNIT IF SUCH WAS FOUND TO BE
APPROPRIATE.
/2/ SECTION 7112(A)(1) PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART:
. . . THE AUTHORITY SHALL DETERMINE ANY UNIT TO BE AN APPROPRIATE
UNIT ONLY IF THE DETERMINATION WILL ENSURE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE
COMMUNITY OF INTEREST AMONG THE EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIT AND WILL PROMOTE
EFFECTIVE DEALINGS WITH, AND EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATIONS OF, THE AGENCY
INVOLVED.