At this time FLRA remains fully operational. Effective Friday July 31, 2020, the agency now extends the prohibition on in-person filings indefinitely.  

See details: here.

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

14:0107(22)CA - DOD Dependents Schools and NEA/Overseas Education Association, Pacific Area Director -- 1984 FLRAdec CA

[ v14 p107 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:

 14 FLRA No. 22
 Charging Party
                                            Case No. 38-CA-20113
                            DECISION AND ORDER
    This matter is before the Authority pursuant to the Regional
 Director's "Order Transferring Case to the Authority" in accordance with
 section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
    Upon consideration of the entire record in this case, including the
 stipulation of facts and the parties' contentions, the Authority finds:
    The complaint herein alleges that the Respondent failed and refused
 to comply with section 7131(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management
 Relations Statute (the Statute) by denying the Union's request for
 travel and per diem expenses for Union negotiator William Schussel for
 negotiations conducted on August 24 and September 2, 3, 4 and 9, 1981,
 and the mediation session conducted on September 28, 1981, in violation
 of section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Statute.
    The threshold issue presented in this case is the same as the
 threshold issue presented in Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms v.
 FLRA, 104 S.Ct. 439(1983) wherein the United States Supreme Court
 concluded that the obligation of any agency under section 7131(a) of the
 Statute to provide official time to employees representing an exclusive
 representative in the negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement
 does not encompass the payment of travel expenses and per diem
 allowances.  Pursuant to that decision and for the reasons set forth by
 the Court, the Authority concludes herein that the Respondent did not
 fail or refuse to comply with the provisions of section 7131(a) of the
 Statute.  Therefore, it follows that the Respondent did not violate
 section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Statute.  /1/
    IT IS ORDERED that the complaint in Case No. 38-CA-20113 be, and it
 hereby is, dismissed.  /2/
    Issued, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1984
                                       Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
    /1/ In view of the disposition herein, the Authority finds it
 unnecessary to consider the Respondent's alternative arguments.
    /2/ The Authority received a motion filed by the Counsel for the
 General Counsel seeking to have the case remanded to the Regional
 Director for withdrawal of the complaint and dismissal of the charge.
 In view of the Authority's disposition on the merits of this case, the
 Counsel for the General Counsel's motion is hereby denied.