15:0796(151)NG - NFFE Local 1379 and Interior, Bureau of Land Management , Oregon State Office -- 1984 FLRAdec NG
[ v15 p796 ]
15:0796(151)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 151
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1379
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT,
OREGON STATE OFFICE
Agency
Case No. O-NG-839
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
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 presents an issue
concerning the negotiability of the following proposal:
The competitive area in a reduction-in-force shall consist of
the Bargaining Unit as described in Article II, and Wage
Supervisors over the employees. In addition, any employee
qualified to "bump" or eligible to "retreat" into such jobs shall
also be eligible for inclusion in the competitive area for the
purpose of bumping or retreating only.
Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the
parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determination.
The proposal seeks to define a competitive area within the Agency for
purposes of reduction-in-force (RIF). The Agency asserts that the
proposed competitive area would encompass non-bargaining unit employees,
specifically, supervisors in addition to bargaining unit employees. The
Agency concludes, based upon this fact, that it has no obligation to
bargain over the proposal.
The Authority, in American Federation of Government Employees, Local
32, AFL-CIO and Office of Personnel Management, 14 FLRA No. 98 (1984),
appeal docketed, No. 84-1250 (D.C. Cir. June 15, 1984) has addressed the
negotiability of a proposal dealing with competitive areas for RIF
purposes where an agency established that the proposed competitive area
affected non-bargaining unit employees. In that case the Authority
noted that it is well established that the duty to bargain does not
extend to matters concerning positions and employees outside the
bargaining unit. International Federation of Professional and Technical
Engineers, AFL-CIO, NASA Headquarters Professional Association and
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Headquarters, Washington,
D.C., 8 FLRA 212 (1982) and cases cited therein at note 5. However, an
agency generally may bargain over such matters if it so chooses. See,
e.g., American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2 and
Department of the Army, Military District of Washington, 4 FLRA 450
(1980). Insofar as the proposal defining a competitive area in Office
of Personnel Management was established to directly determine conditions
of employment of nonunit employees, it was found to concern matters
beyond the representation rights of the union and, hence, not within the
agency's obligation to bargain. See also Service Employees'
International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 556 and Department of the Army,
Office of the Adjutant General, Hale Koa Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii, 9 FLRA
686 (1982).
Since, in this case, the proposal by its plain language would
directly determine conditions of employment of employees not within the
bargaining unit, it must be concluded, for the reasons stated in Office
of Personnel Management, that the proposal is similarly outside the duty
to bargain as alleged by the Agency.
Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for review be, and
it hereby is, dismissed.
Issued, Washington, D.C., August 29, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY