19:0617(78)NG - NFFE Local 687 and Air Force HQ 63rd ABG (MAC), Norton AFB, CA -- 1985 FLRAdec NG
[ v19 p617 ]
19:0617(78)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
19 FLRA No. 78
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 687
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,
EADQUARTERS 63rd AIR BASE
GROUP (MAC), NORTON AIR FORCE
BASE, CALIFORNIA
Agency
Case No. O-NG-939
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
This petition for review comes before the Federal Labor Relations
Authority (the Authority) pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(D) and (E) of
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and
raises the question of the negotiability of five Union proposals. Upon
careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties'
contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations. /1/
Union Proposal 1
Except where flexitime or compressed work schedules are
negotiated, the basic workweek is the days and hours of the
administrative workweek which make up the employee's regularly
scheduled 40-hour workweek. The basic workweek at Norton AFB
normally consists of five consecutive eight-hour days with two
consecutive non-duty days. The regular tour of duty for most
employees is five 8-hour days, Monday through Friday. Uncommon
tours of duty; i.e., 40 hour basic workweeks scheduled to include
Saturday and/or Sunday, may be established when necessary to meet
mission requirements. The impact of any change in the hours of
work, shifts or tours of duty will be negotiated with the Union
prior to implementation except in cases of emergencies. (Only the
underlined portion of the proposal is in dispute.)
Union Proposal 2
Normally, an employee will be scheduled to work the same hours
each day on the same days of the administrative workweek. If it
becomes necessary to reassign employees to different tours of duty
or shifts, the procedures specified in Section 7 below will be
followed. When employees are reassigned to different tours, the
employee will be given at least seven days notice in writing
except in cases of emergencies. (Only the underlined portion of
the proposal is in dispute.)
Based upon the language of the proposals and record in the instant
case, both proposals purport to deal in non-emergency circumstances /2/
where the Agency changes the administrative workweek and thereby
employees' previously established hours of duty. The Authority has held
that the Statute requires that, prior to effectuating a change in
established conditions of employment, an agency must give the exclusive
representative notice and an opportunity to negotiate. E.g., Small
Business Administration, Washington, D.C., and Small Business
Administration, Salt Lake City District Office, Salt Lake City, Utah,
and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1099, AFL-CIO
(and cases cited therein), 15 FLRA No. 109 (1984). Union Proposal 1
herein, however, would require the Agency to complete negotiations over
the impact and implementation of any changes in hours of work, shifts or
tours of duty prior to such changes being made. In addition, Union
Proposal 2 would require the Agency to provide seven days written
advance notice to employees reassigned to different tours of duty.
In this respect, Union Proposals 1 and 2 in the instant case are to
the same effect as Provision 1 in American Federation of Government
Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2484 and U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Detrick,
Maryland, 17 FLRA No. 106 (1985) which required two weeks advance notice
of changes in tours of duty and which the Authority found to be
inconsistent with an applicable Government-wide regulation. In the
cited case the Authority determined that 5 CFR 610.121(b)(2) (1984)
obligates an agency head to revise an employee's administrative workweek
to comport with the hours during which the employee will actually be
required to work "(w)hen the head of an agency knows in advance of an
administrative workweek" that such revision is necessary. Thus, the
Authority concluded that as the provision in that case would prevent the
Agency head from revising an employee's work schedule unless he or she
became aware of the need to change work schedules not less than two
weeks prior to the rescheduling, it was inconsistent with a
Government-wide regulation and outside the duty to bargain. /3/
Therefore, based on U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Detrick, since Union
Proposals 1 and 2 would also, in certain circumstances, prevent the
Agency from complying with a Government-wide regulation, they are
likewise outside the duty to bargain pursuant to section 7117(a)(1) of
the Statute.
Union Proposal 3
Employees will not be required or coerced to perform duties in
other than civilian status except during periods of national
emergency, time of war and annual training.
The Union contends the purpose of this proposal is to prohibit
management from coercing or requiring employees to take annual leave,
leave without pay or compensatory time off to perform duties which could
otherwise be done while such employees are in a civilian pay status.
However, contrary to the Union's intent, this proposal expressly
concerns the assignment of work to employees when they are "in other
than civilian status." In this respect, when Air Reserve technicians are
performing duties "in other than civilian status" they are functioning
in their military capacity as members of the Air Force Reserve. That
is, Air Reserve technicians generally are required to become members of
and maintain membership in the Air Force Reserve in a military capacity
as a condition of continued civilian technician employment. /4/ While
matters related to the civilian aspects of such technician employment
may be within the duty to bargain pursuant to the Statute, matters
related to the military aspects of such technician employment are
specifically prohibited from negotiation by law. /5/ Therefore, as
Union Proposal 3 expressly concerns matters related to the military
aspects of Air Force Reserve technician employment it is not within the
duty to bargain pursuant to section 7117(a)(1) of the Statute.
Union Proposal 4
Air Reserve Technicians while on TDY will be given parity to
their civilian grade which includes all the entitlements of AFR
90-9. The individual may request billeting at his/her military
grade at the employee's option.
Union Proposal 5
Temporary duty and flight authorization orders for Air Reserve
Technicians traveling in civilian status will only reflect their
civilian grade: i.e., GS-9 or WG-10.
Union Proposals 4 and 5 provide that Air Force Reserve technicians on
temporary duty may, at their option, be assigned quarters based on their
civilian grade rather than on their military grade. In this regard, in
National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1669 and Arkansas Air
National Guard, 13 FLRA 176 (1983), aff'd sub nom. National Federation
of Federal Employees, Local 1699 v. FLRA, 745 F.2d 705 (1984), the
Authority determined that a compelling need existed pursuant to section
2424.11(c) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations for a National Guard
Bureau regulation which required that National Guard technicians be
assigned government quarters based on their military grade as contrasted
with their civilian grade when such technicians were in a travel status.
See also American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local
3004 and Department of the Army and Air Force, National Guard Bureau, 15
FLRA No. 58 (1984). The regulation in question had been issued to
implement a directive from the House Committee on Appropriations to the
Department of Defense to the effect that military technicians in travel
status would occupy government quarters based on their military grade.
/6/ This nondiscretionary directive was contained in the report
accompanying the "Department of Defense Appropriations Bill of 1982" and
was agreed to by the Conference Committee. /7/ While Arkansas Air
National Guard and Department of Army and Air Force, National Guard
Bureau concerned only a National Guard Bureau regulation, the directive
from Congress to the Department of Defense that military technicians in
a travel status will occupy temporary quarters based on their military
grade expressly applies to Army and Air Force Reserve technicians as
well. Therefore, AFR 90-9 and AFR 10-7, /8/ at issue in this case,
which require respectively that the Air Force Reserve technicians be
quartered according to their military grade and that travel orders
include both military and civilian grades, reflect this nondiscretionary
mandate and meet the criterion for determining a compelling need
pursuant to section 2424.11(c) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
Consequently, since Union Proposals 4 and 5 are inconsistent with AFR
90-9 and AFR 10-7 they are not within the duty to bargain under section
7117(a)(2) of the Statute.
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 12, 1985
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The Union did not file a Reply Brief in this case.
/2/ The term emergency has been defined by the parties in their
collective bargaining agreement as "situations posing sudden, immediate
and unforeseen work requirements for the Employer as a result of natural
phenomena or other circumstances beyond the Employer's reasonable
control or ability to anticipate. A situation in which the Employer has
been informed of an impending exercise or inspection which will result
in an increase in workload will not be considered an emergency."
/3/ The Authority also found a second provision requiring one pay
period advance notice of non-workday rotation schedule changes to be
inconsistent with the same Government-wide regulation and outside the
duty to bargain.
/4/ FPM Supplement (Internal) 930-71 (December 1983). See also
American Federation of Government Employees v. Resor, 387 F.Supp. 63
(D.D.C. 1974).
/5/ 10 U.S.C. 976 (1982).
/6/ The House Committee on Appropriations Report provided, in
relevant part:
GUARD AND RESERVE TECHNICIAN CONVERSION PROGRAM
The Committee conducted an extensive hearing on the Guard and
Reserve technician conversion program and includes the following
direction to the Department.
. . . .
Military technicians will occupy government quarters based on
military grade when in a travel status.
H.R. REP. No. 97-333, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. 42 (1981).
/7/ The Conference Report provided in relevant part:
The following language items represent the agreement of the
conferees. Specific dollar amounts by military service are
reflected under each summary table. Language contained in the
report of only one body and not addressed below should be
considered the agreement of the conferees.
H.R. REP. No. 97-410, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. 9 (1981).
/8/ AFR 90-9 states as follows: "AFRES and ANG technicians in travel
status will be billeted according to the military grade shown in their
travel orders."
AFR 10-7 states as follows: (travel orders) "for Air Reserve
technicians traveling in their civilian capacity include both military
and civilian grades, E.G., (GS-9 SMSGT USAFR)."