U.S. Department of the Army, 94th U.S. Army Reserve Command, Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts (Respondent) and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1900 (Charging Party) 

 8 FLRA No. 13
 
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
 94TH U.S. ARMY RESERVE COMMAND
 HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE
 MASSACHUSETTS
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 LOCAL 1900
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 1-CA-274
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO REGIONAL DIRECTOR
 EDWARD S. DAVIDSON'S "ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE FEDERAL LABOR
 RELATIONS AUTHORITY" IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2429.1 OF THE
 AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2429.1(A)).
 
    UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, THE AUTHORITY
 FINDS:
 
    THE GENERAL COUNSEL ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT THAT THE RESPONDENT
 VIOLATED SECTION 7116(A)(1) AND (8) OF THE STATUTE /1/ WHEN IT REFUSED
 TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO ONE OF ITS EMPLOYEES WHILE HE REPRESENTED
 EMPLOYEES OF ANOTHER COMMAND IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE LATTER
 COMMAND.  THE ALLEGATION IS THAT THE DENIAL OF OFFICIAL TIME UNDER THESE
 CIRCUMSTANCES IS CONTRARY TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7131(A) OF THE
 STATUTE.  /2/ THE RESPONDENT DENIES THAT ITS ACTION AMOUNTED TO AN
 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE. THE QUESTION, THUS, IS WHETHER THE RESPONDENT IS
 REQUIRED BY SECTION 7131(A) TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO ITS EMPLOYEES
 WHILE THEY ARE ENGAGED IN NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF
 EMPLOYEES OF A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT COMMAND.
 
    THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1900 (THE
 UNION) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF A BARGAINING UNIT OF EMPLOYEES
 LOCATED AT HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE, BEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS WHO ARE
 EMPLOYEES OF THE RESPONDENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, 94TH U.S. ARMY
 RESERVE COMMAND.  THE UNION IS ALSO THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF
 SEVERAL OTHER UNITS, INCLUDING ONE CONSISTING OF EMPLOYEES OF THE
 CONCORD DISTRICT RECRUITING COMMAND, CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE, WHICH IS
 PART OF THE U.S. ARMY RECRUITING COMMAND.
 
    BOTH THE RESPONDENT AND THE U.S. ARMY RECRUITING COMMAND ARE
 SUBORDINATE ELEMENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ARMY.  HOWEVER, THE PARTIES
 STIPULATED, AND THE AUTHORITY FINDS, THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE
 ORGANIZATIONS IN TERMS OF FUNCTION AND MISSION AND ARE NOT INTERRELATED
 IN ANY ORGANIZATIONAL MANNER.  THE STIPULATION SHOWS THAT THEY HAVE
 SEPARATE MISSIONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND CHAINS OF COMMAND.
 
    JOHN ESPOSITO IS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE RESPONDENT.  HE IS THE PRESIDENT
 OF LOCAL 1900 AND THE UNION'S CHIEF NEGOTIATOR IN CONTRACT BARGAINING.
 ON OR ABOUT FEBRUARY 6, 1980, ESPOSITO REQUESTED THAT THE RESPONDENT
 GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO HIM FOR THE TIME HE WOULD BE ENGAGED IN
 NEGOTIATING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE UNION
 WITH THE CONCORD DISTRICT RECRUITING COMMAND.  THE RESPONDENT DENIED AND
 CONTINUES TO DENY THAT REQUEST ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO
 REQUIREMENT UNDER SECTION 7131(A) THAT IT GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO ITS OWN
 EMPLOYEES WHILE THEY REPRESENT EMPLOYEES OF A COMPLETELY SEPARATE
 COMMAND IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THAT COMMAND.  THE GENERAL COUNSEL
 CONTENDS THAT THE RESPONDENT'S REFUSAL TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME IS
 CONTRARY TO THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 7131(A) AND THEREFORE VIOLATED
 SECTION 7116(A)(1) AND (8) OF THE STATUTE.
 
    BASED ON ITS DECISION AND RATIONALE IN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE,
 2750TH AIR BASE WING HEADQUARTERS, AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND,
 WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO.  7 FLRA NO. 118(1982), IN WHICH IT WAS HELD
 THAT OFFICIAL TIME ENTITLEMENT UNDER SECTION 7131(A) ACCRUES ONLY TO AN
 EMPLOYEE, SERVING AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE,
 WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE BARGAINING UNIT TO WHICH THE RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE
 THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT APPLIES, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT
 THE RESPONDENT DID NOT VIOLATE SECTION 7116(A)(1) AND (8) OF THE STATUTE
 AND THAT THE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE COMPLAINT IN CASE NO. 1-CA-274 BE, AND
 IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., FEBRUARY 8, 1982
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
                       LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
 
 
    /1/ SEC. 7116.  UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
 
    (A) FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER, IT SHALL BE AN UNFAIR LABOR
 PRACTICE FOR AN AGENCY--
 
    (1) TO INTERFERE WITH, RESTRAIN, OR COERCE ANY EMPLOYEE IN THE
 EXERCISE BY THE EMPLOYEE OF
 
    ANY RIGHT UNDER THIS CHAPTER;
 
   *          *          *          *
 
 
    (8) TO OTHERWISE FAIL OR REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH ANY PROVISION OF THIS
 CHAPTER.
 
    /2/ SEC. 7131. OFFICIAL TIME
 
    (A) ANY EMPLOYEE REPRESENTING AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE IN THE
 NEGOTIATION OF A
 
    COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT UNDER THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE
 AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TIME FOR SUCH
 
    PURPOSES, INCLUDING ATTENDANCE AT IMPASSE PROCEEDING, DURING THE TIME
 THE EMPLOYEE OTHERWISE
 
    WOULD BE IN A DUTY STATUS.  THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES FOR WHOM OFFICIAL
 TIME IS AUTHORIZED UNDER
 
    THIS SUBSECTION SHALL NOT EXCEED THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS DESIGNATED
 AT REPRESENTING THE
 
    AGENCY FOR SUCH PROPOSES.