10:0133(27)NG - AFGE Local 3400 and HHS, Health Care Financing Administration, Chicago Regional Office -- 1982 FLRAdec NG
[ v10 p133 ]
10:0133(27)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
10 FLRA No. 27
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 3400
(Union)
and
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION,
CHICAGO REGIONAL OFFICE
(Activity)
Case No. O-NG-668
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
This case is before the Authority at this time on a motion filed by
the union on October 25, 1982, seeking reconsideration of the
Authority's Order of September 24, 1982, dismissing the union's petition
for review. /1/ For the reason set forth below, the union's motion must
be denied.
Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, effective
September 10, 1981, provides, in pertinent part:
Sec. 2429.17 Reconsideration.
After a final decision or order of the Authority has been
issued, a party to the proceeding before the Authority who can
establish in its moving papers extraordinary circumstances for so
doing, may move for reconsideration of such final decision or
order. The motion shall be filed within ten (10) days after
service of the Authority's decision or order . . . .
As indicated above, the subject Order of the Authority was dated and
served upon the union by mail on September 24, 1982. Therefore, under
section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, and sections
2429.21 and 2429.22, which are also applicable to the time limit here
involved, the union's motion for reconsideration had to be filed, i.e.,
received in the national office of the Authority, no later than the
close of business on October 12, 1982, in order to be considered timely.
However, since the union's motion was not filed until October 25, 1982,
it is clearly untimely and must be denied on that basis.
Accordingly, the union's motion for reconsideration is hereby denied.
/2/ For the Authority. Issued, Washington, D.C., February 10, 1983
James J. Shepard, Executive
Director
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The union's petition was dismissed because it appeared clear from
the submissions of the parties in the record before the Authority that
the union had sought to negotiate procedures for a specific, planned
reduction-in-force (RIF), which RIF had been cancelled by the agency;
and, further, that the parties had not been negotiating procedures that
were to be applicable to any other RIF situation. It was therefore
likewise apparent that the union was in effect seeking an advisory
opinion from the Authority concerning its proposals for possible use in
the future. Since section 2429.10 of the Authority Rules and
Regulations precludes the issuance of advisory opinions, the union's
petition was dismissed.
/2/ It should be noted that the Authority's September 24, 1982
dismissal Order was without prejudice to the union seeking to negotiate
procedures which would be applicable to RIF situations other than the
one that was cancelled, submitting specific proposals for the purpose of
such negotiations and duly filing a petition for review of any
negotiability issues that might arise in connection with such
negotiations, in accordance with the Federal Service Labor-Management
Relations Statute and the Authority's Rules and Regulations.