11:0234(49)NG - AFGE Local 1900 and Army, HQ, 76th Division (Training), West Hartford, CT -- 1983 FLRAdec NG
[ v11 p234 ]
11:0234(49)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
11 FLRA No. 49
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1900
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, HEADQUARTERS,
76th DIVISION (TRAINING), WEST
HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT
Agency
Case No. O-NG-76
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority
pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and raises issues
relating to the negotiability of ten Union proposals. Upon careful
consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions,
the Authority makes the following determinations.
The ten proposals at issue in this case were presented by the Union
in response to the Agency's implementation of a "Military Technician
Conversion Program." This program, instituted as a test program on the
recommendation of Congress, lasted from March 1979 through June 1980 and
was undertaken to ascertain whether the military reserve components,
i.e., the National Guard and the Army and Air Force Reserve, could
attract and retain active duty military personnel to fill vacant
positions in the reserve components previously held by civilian
technicians. Six of the ten proposals herein, set forth in the
appendix, relate solely to the now terminated test program and thus
became moot as of July 1980. However, as the record in this case also
indicates that Congress, upon review of the test results, authorized the
Agency to continue converting civilian technician positions, the
remaining four proposals, relating to such conversions, are decided
herein. See American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local
3742 and Department of the Army, Headquarters, 98th Division (Training),
Webster, New York, 11 FLRA No. 42 (1983).
Union Proposal 3
Guaranteed opportunities for advancement and lateral transfer
for civilian employees.
Union Proposal 4
Guaranteed opportunities for civilian technicians to advance to
first level supervisory and/or management positions.
Union Proposal 5
Guaranteed opportunities for women and minority employees for
advancement.
These three Union proposals are essentially similar to Union
Proposals 5, 6 and 7 in the 98th Division case. Noting that the three
proposals in that case would require the Agency to structure its
organization in a manner assuring promotional opportunities for civilian
technicians, the Authority concluded that they conflicted with
management's right to determine its "organization" under section
7106(a)(1) of the Statute. Thus, for the reasons set forth in that
decision and the cases cited therein, Union Proposals 3, 4 and 5 in this
case are outside the duty to bargain.
Union Proposal 7
There will be no annual conversion goals.
In the absence of elaboration on the part of the Union, the Authority
adopts the Agency's reasonable view that "this proposal refers to the
number of civilian technician positions either being established or
becoming vacant which will be converted to military slots." Thus, this
proposal would prevent management from determining the ratio between
civilian technician positions and military positions it desires to
attain at the end of any annual period. As the Authority noted with
respect to Union Proposal 8 in the 98th Division decision, when an
Agency establishes the ratio between military and civilian positions in
an organizational element, it is exercising its right under section
7106(a)(1) of the Statute to determine its "organization." The instant
proposal, by preventing management from determining in the future the
numbers of civilian positions and positions to be occupied by military
personnel, respectively, directly interferes with management's section
7106(a)(1) right to determine its "organization" and is, therefore,
outside the duty to bargain. See also National Federation of Federal
Employees, Local 1431 and Veterans Administration Medical Center, East
Orange, New Jersey, 9 FLRA No. 139 (1982).
Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and
it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., February 3, 1983
Ronald W. Haughton, Chairman
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
Leon B. Applewhaite, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
APPENDIX - PROPOSALS WHICH ARE MOOT
Union Proposal 1
(a) Only entry level positions will be utilized for the test
program.
(b) All other vacancies above entry level will be announced.
If through competitive procedures no civilians fill these
vacancies, then and only then, the vacancies may be filled by a
military technician.
Union Proposal 2
There will be no abolishment of ART Positions on TDAs, instead
entry positions will be reported as temporary fills by military
for the test period.
Union Proposal 6
Any civilian employees who are reassigned for test purposes
will be returned to his/her original position upon completion of
the test.
Union Proposal 8
It is agreed that all present civilian employees of the 76th
Division will be covered by a "grandfather clause" effective March
15, 1979.
Union Proposal 9
The test period will run for a 12 month period.
Union Proposal 10
AFGE Local 1900 and 2839 will be involved in the test
evaluation process.