10:0659(108)RO - Navy, Navy Publications and Printing Service Branch Office, Vallejo, CA and IFPTE Local 11 -- 1982 FLRAdec RP
[ v10 p659 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
10 FLRA No. 108 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVY PUBLICATIONS AND PRINTING SERVICE BRANCH OFFICE, VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA Activity and INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, LOCAL 11, AFL-CIO Local Organization/Petitioner Case No. 9-RO-65 DECISION AND ORDER 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, including a brief filed by the Activity, the Authority finds: The Petitioner, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 11, AFL-CIO, seeks an election in a unit composed of "all (non-professional) employees of the Navy Publications and Printing Service Branch Office, Vallejo, California, and of the Satellite Office at Concord, California." At the hearing in this matter, the Petitioner stated its willingness to proceed to an election in an alternate unit composed of "the (non-professional) employees at Oakland, Alameda, Concord . . . and Vallejo, California." /1/ The Activity principally contends that neither the petitioned for unit nor the alternate unit sought is appropriate under the Statute because the employees involved do not share a community of interest separate and distinct from the employees in the other offices and satellites of the Navy Publications and Printing Service Office, Oakland, California (NPPSO Oakland), and that granting such units would lead to unwarranted fragmentation of the Oakland Office and would not promote effective dealings and efficiency of agency operations. The Petitioner contends that it would be a financial burden to represent properly all of the NPPSO Oakland employees, noting that two of the satellites are 300 miles and 75 miles distant, and therefore, based on distinct geographic location, its petitioned for unit or the alternate unit should be found appropriate. The Authority finds that neither the unit which the Petitioner seeks to represent nor the alternate unit which it is willing to represent is appropriate for exclusive recognition under section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute. 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 dealing with, and efficiency of the operations of, the agency involved. Thus, in order to be found appropriate, a proposed unit must meet all three of the foregoing criteria; /2/ a failure to satisfy any one of them must result in a finding that the unit sought is inappropriate. The record establishes that the employees sought do not have a clear and identifiable community of interest separate and distinct from other employees of NPPSO, Oakland, California. All the employees of the Oakland Office share essentially the same terms and conditions of employment. Since October 1, 1980, the printing functions at all Navy facilities have been consolidated under the NPPS. The NPPSO Oakland is one of the five main offices under the Western Division of NPPS. The Director of the Oakland Office is responsible for the negotiation of labor agreements, grievance handling, and establishing labor relations and personnel policies and practices which all the branch and satellite offices are bound to follow. All the employees of the Oakland Office possess essentially the same job classifications, skills, and qualifications; are part of an integrated work process; share a common mission and organizational structure; and are subject to the same area of consideration for promotions, competitive area for reductions-in-force, and uniform annual performance ratings. Based upon the foregoing, the Authority finds that neither the petitioned for unit nor the alternate unit is appropriate for exclusive recognition under section 7112(a)(1), and the petition shall therefore be dismissed. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 9-RO-65 be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., December 13, 1982 Ronald W. Haughton, Chairman Henry B. Frazier III, Member Leon B. Applewhaite, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ The Authority interprets this alternative unit description to mean that the Petitioner is willing to represent only the eligible employees of the Headquarters Office and of the Production Department located in Building 441 of the Navy Publications and Printing Service Office, Oakland, California, as well as the five satellite offices of the Production Department, all of which are less than two miles distant from Building 441, and all eligible employees of the Navy Publications and Printing Service Branch Office, Alameda, California, as well as its two satellite offices, both of which are approximately one half mile from the Alameda Branch Office. All other employees within the Navy Publications and Printing Service Office, Oakland, California, would be excluded from the alternate unit. /2/ See, e.g., Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89 (1981).