15:0607(129)NG - AFGE Local 225 and Army, USARRADCOM, Dover, NJ -- 1984 FLRAdec NG
[ v15 p607 ]
15:0607(129)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 129
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO, LOCAL 225
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
USARRADCOM, DOVER, NEW JERSEY
Agency
Case No. O-NG-670
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority
pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(D) and (E) of the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), and raises issues
relating to the negotiability of the following Union proposal. Upon
careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties'
contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations.
Union Proposal
Collection action on any indebtedness where there is no
evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, fault or lack of good faith
on the part of the employee, will be suspended until notification
of the final action on the application for waiver.
The Union explains that the proposal is intended to defer collection
action, until a requested waiver is granted or denied, on claims by the
Federal Government against unit employees arising out of certain
erroneous payments to the employees.
Collection of claims by the Federal Government is addressed by 31
U.S.C. 3711-3719. Additionally, collection of claims against Federal
employees by means of deductions from their pay is governed by 5 U.S.C.
5514. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5584, claims against Federal employees may
under certain circumstances be waived in whole or in part. /1/ The
Comptroller General (CG) and the Attorney General are charged with
prescribing standards governing the collection and compromise of claims
by the Government. /2/ These standards (Federal Claims Collection
Standards) are codified at 4 CFR 101.1 et seq. and apply generally to
civil claims by the Federal Government for money and property. /3/
Among other things, the Federal Claims Collection Standards govern the
suspension of collection action on debt claims. /4/ As relevant herein
they authorize suspension only based on appropriate consideration of all
of the following three factors:
(1) There is a reasonable possibility that waiver will be
granted, or that the debt (in whole or in part) will be found not
owing from the debtor;
(2) The Government's interests would be protected, if
suspension were granted, by reasonable assurance that the debt
could be recovered if the debtor does not prevail; and
(3) Collection of the debt will cause undue hardship.
The Authority finds that, given their scope and nature as discussed
earlier herein, the Federal Claims Collection Standards are
Government-wide rules and regulations within the meaning of section 7117
of the Statute. See National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 6 and
Internal Revenue Service, New Orleans District, 3 FLRA 748 at 751-755
(1980). Further, the Authority finds that inasmuch as the Union
proposal provides for suspension without regard to consideration, as
contemplated by the Federal Claims Collection Standards, of the three
factors set forth above in making determinations on whether to suspend
collection action in the face of a waiver application the proposal is
inconsistent with a Government-wide rule or regulation. /5/ The
proposal, therefore, is not within the duty to bargain. /6/ Internal
Revenue Service, New Orleans District, supra.
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., August 28, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ Standards governing such waivers have been promulgated by the
Comptroller General and appear at 4 CFR 91.1-91.5.
/2/ 31 U.S.C. 3711.
/3/ 4 CFR 101.1.
/4/ 49 Fed.Reg. 8889 (1984).
/5/ Cf. National Treasury Employees Union and Department of the
Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, 6 FLRA 508 (1981) (Union Proposal I)
wherein the Authority found that a proposal which would require
reimbursement for training expenses without regard for applicable
statutory limitations was not within the duty to bargain.
/6/ In view of this decision, the Authority finds it unnecessary to
address the Agency's other contentions as to the negotiability of the
proposal.