16:0093(21)CA - Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, NH and Portsmouth FEMT Council -- 1984 FLRAdec CA
[ v16 p93 ]
16:0093(21)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
16 FLRA No. 21
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD
PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
Respondent
and
PORTSMOUTH FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL
TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO
Charging Party
Case No. 1-CA-427
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Authority pursuant to the Regional
Director's "Order Transferring Case to the Federal Labor Relations
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, accompanying exhibits, and the contentions of the
parties, the Authority finds:
The complaint alleges that the Department of the Navy, Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire (the Respondent), violated
section 7116(a)(1) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
Statute (the Statute) when it issued a two-day suspension notice and
then suspended Lionel A. Gravel, a supervisor within the meaning of the
Statute, because of his participation in the processing of an employee's
grievance by the Portsmouth Federal Employees Metal Trades Council (the
Union). It is alleged that the Respondent's conduct had a chilling
effect on the exercise of the protected rights of employees. /1/
The events culminating in Gravel's suspension began when unit
employee Morin and another employee were observed away from their duty
stations shortly before the end of their shift. This was brought to the
attention of superintendent Dostie, who instructed their supervisor,
Gravel, to discuss the matter with the two men and to discipline them.
About a month later, Morin was notified of a proposed five-day
suspension without pay because of his unexcused absence from his post of
duty. The notice was signed by his supervisor, Gravel. Shortly
thereafter, however, Gravel signed a memorandum, prepared by the Union,
stating that he had signed the suspension notice only because he was
directed to do so; that he did not agree the suspension was necessary
or proper; that Morin had been punished enough by losing potential
overtime because of the same infraction; and that the loss of potential
overtime was itself sufficient to prevent another infraction and to
serve as an example to other employees.
Gravel's memorandum was submitted to Dostie by the Union's Chief
Steward in connection with an oral reply to the proposed disciplinary
action, and Morin's proposed five-day suspension was later reduced to
one day. Shortly thereafter, Gravel was notified that he would be
suspended for five days without pay, in part because his signing the
above-described memorandum prepared by the Union was inconsistent with
his allegiance to management. Gravel's suspension was later reduced to
two days.
Section 7102 of the Statute states that "(e)ach employee shall have
the right to form, join, or assist any labor organization, or to refrain
from any such activity . . . and shall be protected in the exercise of
such right", and section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute makes it an unfair
labor practice for an agency to interfere with, restrain, or coerce
employees in the exercise of such rights. /2/ By the express language
of the Statute, the protection is limited to "employees" as defined in
section 7103(a)(2) of the Statute, which definition specifically
excludes supervisors. /3/ Therefore, supervisors are not protected
under the Statute when engaged in certain activities the performance of
which would be statutorily protected if they were employees. In the
Authority's view, however, under some circumstances, discipline taken
against a supervisor may be found to have such a chilling effect on the
exercise of protected rights by employees that it interferes with,
restrains, or coerces such employees in the exercise of their rights
under the Statute in violation of section 7116(a)(1). The sole issue in
this case is whether the Respondent's suspension of Gravel constituted
an unfair labor practice under the circumstances. The Authority
concludes that it did not.
In this regard, Gravel simply stated an opinion with respect to which
his own supervisors took exception. He was not disciplined, for
example, for giving testimony as to facts which were adverse to the
Respondent. Therefore, a finding that the discipline imposed on Gravel
would chill the exercise by employees of their right to grieve and to
present relevant evidence in support of their grievances is not
warranted here. The Authority notes particularly that no evidence was
presented that the discipline of Gravel had any effect whatsoever on the
exercise of employee rights or that such discipline would tend to have
any such effect. By disciplining Gravel under these circumstances, the
Respondent did not violate the Statute. Accordingly, the Authority
shall dismiss the instant complaint.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the complaint in Case No. 1-CA-427 be, and it
hereby is, dismissed in its entirety.
Issued, Washington, D.C., September 28, 1984
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The Respondent alleges that the supervisor was suspended for
other and unrelated conduct on his part. In view of our decision
herein, consideration of that question is unnecessary.
/2/ Section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute provides:
Sec. 7116. Unfair labor practices
(a) For the purpose of this chapter, it shall be an unfair
labor practice for an agency--
(1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce any employee in the
exercise by the employee of any right under this chapter(.)
/3/ Section 7103(a)(2) of the Statute provides:
Sec. 7103. Definitions; application
(a) For the purpose of this chapter--
* * * *
(2) 'employee' means an individual--
(A) employed in an agency; or
(B) who employment in an agency has ceased because of any
unfair labor practice under section 7116 of this title and who has
not obtained any other regular and substantially equivalent
employment, as determined under regulations prescribed by the
Federal Labor Relations Authority;
but does not include--
* * * *
(iii) a supervisor or a management official(.)