Please note that Friday, January 20, 2017, is a federal holiday for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.  The following FLRA offices will not be open to accept in-person case filings or to respond to phone calls on that day:  the Authority’s Case Intake and Publication Office, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the Washington Regional Office, and the Federal Service Impasses Panel.  The FLRA’s eFiling System remains available.         

19:0812(98)NG - NFFE Local 1363 and Army HQ, Army Garrison, Yongsan, Korea -- 1985 FLRAdec NG



[ v19 p812 ]
19:0812(98)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 19 FLRA No. 98
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1363
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HEADQUARTERS,
 U.S. ARMY GARRISON, YONGSAN, KOREA
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-1048
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)
 on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by the Union.
 
    The record before the Authority indicates that the local activity
 informed the Union that it planned to change funding procedures for over
 water travel which would affect bargaining unit employees.  In response,
 the Union submitted a proposal and in writing requested a written
 nonnegotiability allegation from the Agency.  When the Agency did not
 respond after ten days, the Union filed the instant petition for review
 with the Authority without a written nonnegotiability allegation
 pursuant to section 2424.3 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, as
 to whether the disputed proposal was within the duty to bargain.
 Subsequently, in a letter to the Authority, dated September 18, 1984,
 the Agency requested that the Union's petition for review be dismissed
 as being prematurely filed because "(n)o allegation of nonnegotiability
 was made, nor is an allegation being made now."
 
    In these circumstances, i.e., since the Agency has stated in effect
 that it does not view the proposal as nonnegotiable, there is no issue
 as to whether this proposal is within the duty to bargain under the
 Statute.  /1/
 
    Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the petition for
 review in this case is hereby dismissed without prejudice to the Union
 refiling should the Agency assert the proposal to be nonnegotiable in
 the future.  Issued, Washington, D.C., August 19, 1985
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ Cf. American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local
 3028 and Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service,
 Alaska Area Native Health Service, 13 FLRA 697 (1984) (wherein the
 Authority found that failure to respond to a union's request for an
 allegation was a constructive declaration of nonnegotiability so as to
 give rise to a right of appeal).