18:0091(17)NG - AFGE Local 32 and OPM -- 1985 FLRAdec NG

 18 FLRA No. 17
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 32
 Union 
 
 and 
 
 OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-961
 
                 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 raises an issue
 concerning the negotiability of one Union proposal.  Upon careful
 consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions,
 the Authority makes the following determination.
 
          Employees will be allowed some flexibility in establishing the
       new work control system and desk organization as long as it is
       O.K.'d by their supervisor.  Any such approval of alternate plans
       will be noted and signed on the employee's copy of the training
       memo.
 
    While not explained by the parties, the terms "work control system"
 and "desk organization" referred to in the proposal appear to concern
 the manner in which employees perform their assigned duties.  Thus, this
 proposal provides that proposed changes in the manner in which employees
 perform their assigned duties would be subject to approval by a
 designated individual, specifically, the employee's supervisor.  In this
 regard, this proposal is to the same effect as the third sentence of
 Union Proposal 2 in American Federation of Government Employees,
 AFL-CIO, Local 1858 and Department of the Army, U.S. Army Missile
 Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, 10 FLRA 440 (1982).  In Redstone
 Arsenal, the Authority relied upon Congressional Research Employees
 Association and the Library of Congress, 3 FLRA 737 (1980) (Section 8 of
 the Union's Proposal) to find the third sentence of the proposal which
 specified the personnel within an agency who would perform certain
 functions, including assigning work to bargaining unit employees, to be
 nonnegotiable.  The Authority reasoned that such portion of the proposal
 implicitly prevented management from assigning those functions to other
 agency personnel and thus directly interfered with the right to assign
 work under section 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute.  Similarly, the instant
 proposal, which requires that specified personnel, i.e., an employee's
 supervisor will approve changes in the manner in which employees perform
 their assigned duties, also directly interferes with management's right
 to assign work and is outside the duty to bargain.  See National
 Federation of Federal Employees, Local 943 and Department of the Air
 Force, Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi, 16 FLRA No. 49 (1984)
 (Section D of the Union's Proposal).
 
    Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review be, and it
 hereby is, dismissed.  Issued, Washington, D.C., May 22, 1985
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY