American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3098 (Union) and Indiana Air National Guard, Hulman Field, Terre Haute, Indiana (Agency)
[ v07 p750 ]
07:0750(121)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
7 FLRA No. 121
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3098
Union
and
INDIANA AIR NATIONAL GUARD,
HULMAN FIELD
TERRE HAUTE, INDIANA
Agency
Case No. O-NG-233
DICISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IN THIS CASE COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR
RELATIONS AUTHORITY (THE AUTHORITY) PURS7ANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF
THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE),
AND RAISES THE QUESTION OF THE NEGOTIABILITY OF TWO UNION PROPOSALS.
UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD, /1/ INCLUDING THE
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS, THE AUTHORITY MAKES THE FOLLOWING DETERMINATIONS.
UNION PROPOSALS I AND II
UNION PROPOSAL I
SECTION 7C. A HEARING, IF REQUESTED AS A RESULT OF AN ORIGINAL
DECISION, WILL BE SCHEDULED
AT THE EARLIEST PRACTICABLE DATE, AND SHOULD BE CONDUCTED WITHIN 30
DAYS FROM THE DATE A
HEARING EXAMINER IS APPROVED. AT THE REQUEST OF THE UNION, AN
ARBITRATION HEARING MAY TAKE
THE PLACE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING. SELECTION OF AN ARBITRATOR
SHALL BE MADE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE . . . . ARBITRATION AND THE AWARD IS
BINDING. IF AN EMPLOYEE ELECTS
TO APPEAL AN ADVERSE ACTION, THE APPEAL MAY BE SUBMITTED AT ANY TIME
WITHIN THE 15 CALENDAR
DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF ORIGINAL DECISION.
UNION PROPOSAL II
SECTION 10. THE STATE ADJUTANT GENERAL WILL RENDER HIS FINAL
DECISION BY CONSIDERING THE
HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION AND ISSUE HIS DECISION ON THE
APPEAL OR TAKE A LESS SEVERE
ACTION THAN RECOMMENDED BY THE EXAMINER, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE
EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. IF
AN EMPLOYEE ELECTED TO USE BINDING ARBITRATION, THE ARBITRATOR'S
DECISION SHALL BE BINDING ON
THE PARTIES. THE EMPLOYEE AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE WILL BE FURNISHED A
COPY OF THE FINDINGS AND FINAL DECISION.
UNION PROPOSALS I AND II PRINCIPALLY WOULD INCLUDE WITHIN THE SCOPE
AND COVERAGE OF THE NEGOTIATED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE MATTERS RELATING TO
APPEALS OF ADVERSE ACTIONS INVOLVING NATIONAL GUARD TECHNICIANS AS WELL
AS PROVIDE THE EMPLOYEE AN OPTION TO APPEAL AN ADVERSE ACTION THROUGH
THE STATUTORY OR NEGOTIATED PROCEDURE. IN THIS REGARD, THE PROPOSALS
BEAR NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE FROM THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL WHICH WAS HELD
NEGOTIABLE IN NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL
R12-132 AND CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD, 5 FLRA NO. 25(1981), APPEAL
DOCKETED, NO. 81-7231 (9TH CIR. APR. 17, 1981). THEREFORE, CONTRARY TO
THE AGENCY'S ASSERTIONS THAT THE PROPOSALS ARE OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO
BARGAIN BECAUSE THEY ARE INCONSISTENT WITH LAW (32 U.S.C. 709(E)(5) AND
BASED ON THE REASONS SET FORTH IN DETAIL IN THE CALIFORNIA NATIONAL
GUARD CASE, UNION PROPOSALS I AND II MUST ALSO BE HELD TO BE WITHIN THE
DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION
2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2424.10(1981)),
IT IS ORDERED THAT THE AGENCY SHALL UPON REQUEST (OR AS OTHERWISE AGREED
TO BY THE PARTIES) BARGAIN CONCERNING UNION PROPOSALS I AND II. /2/
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 28, 1982
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
/1/ THE AGENCY'S SUBMISSION FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE UNION'S RESPONSE
WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITY AS IT DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR FILING ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS TO THE AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 2424.8
OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.
/2/ IN FINDING UNION PROPOSALS I AND II NEGOTIABLE, THE AUTHORITY
MAKES NO JUDGMENT AS TO THEIR MERITS.