22:0397(39)NG - ACT and The Adjutant General of Massachusetts -- 1986 FLRAdec NG
[ v22 p397 ]
22:0397(39)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
22 FLRA No. 39
ASSOCIATION OF CIVILIAN
TECHNICIANS
Union
and
THE ADJUTANT GENERAL OF
MASSACHUSETTS
Agency
Case No. 0-NG-1169
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
I. Statement of the Case
This case is before the Authority because of a negotiability appeal
filed under section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and presents an issue
concerning the negotiability of a single Union proposal. /*/
II. Union Proposal
Integrated Combat Turns (ICT)
No technician will perform ICTs while in a technician status.
III. Positions of the Parties
The Agency contends that the proposal interferes with its management
rights under section 7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Statute to assign
employees and work because the proposal would restrict the Agency in
making new assignments and would forbid the Agency from assigning duties
to a military technician. In response, the Union asserts that the
proposal concerns a safety issue, i.e., the fueling, loading of bombs
and maintenance of aircraft being simultaneously performed. According
to the Union, previously this function, which is an integrated combat
turn, was a military requirement performed in military status and only
recently was made a requirement of civilian technicians. Therefore, the
Union maintains that the proposal is a procedure to be used in
implementing the change in working conditions.
IV. Analysis and Conclusions
The explicit language of the proposal requires that the Agency assign
no ICT duties to civilian technicians. The Authority has held that a
proposal prohibiting the assignment of work or duties is violative of
the Agency's right to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B) of the
Statute. American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local
2302 and U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky, 19
FLRA No. 95 (1985) (Proposal 2) and cases cited therein. Since the
proposal in this case would also prohibit the assignment of work, i.e.,
ICT duties, it is also violative of the Agency's right to assign work
under the Statute. Since the proposal directly interferes with the
exercise of the Agency's right to assign work, it is not a negotiable
procedure under the Statute.
V. Order
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., July 9, 1986
/s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
/s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
(*) The Union has withdrawn a proposal concerning a voluntary
physical fitness program. Therefore, the proposal will not be
considered further here.