22:0567(60)NG - AFGE Local 1603 and Naval Hospital, Patuxent River, MD -- 1986 FLRAdec NG
[ v22 p567 ]
22:0567(60)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
22 FLRA No. 60
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1603
Union
and
U.S. NAVAL HOSPITAL,
PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND
Agency
Case No. 0-NG-1217
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 concerns the
negotiability of the following provision of an agreement disapproved by
the Agency head under section 7114(c) of the Statute.
Article IX, Section 5
An employee who believes that he/she has been adversely
affected by application of a performance standard may raise the
issue of whether the performance standard, as applied to the
employee, is fair and reasonable in any grievance proceeding or
arbitration on the matter. In interpreting whether a performance
standard is fair and reasonable, an arbitrator shall bear in mind
that 5 USC 4302 states that the Employer must establish
performance standards which will, to the maximum extent feasible,
permit the accurate evaluation of Job Performance on the basis of
objective criteria related to the job in question.
II. Positions of the Parties
The Agency contends that, to the extent that it requires the
performance standards themselves to be fair and reasonable, as well as
to be fairly and reasonably applied, the disputed provision violates
management's rights to assign work and direct employees under section
7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Statute. The Union did not file a Reply
Brief in this case, but explains, in its petition for review, that the
intent of the provision is to give employees the right to raise before
an arbitrator the issue of whether the employer applied performance
standards fairly and reasonably and in a manner otherwise consistent
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. Section 4302.
III. Analysis and Conclusion
Contrary to the Union's explanation, the clear language of the
disputed provision is not limited to subjecting the application of
performance standards to grievance and arbitral review. It also, by the
language contained in the second sentence as to "whether a performance
standard is fair and reasonable," would require an arbitrator to
determine whether performance standards themselves are fair and
reasonable by reviewing the criteria used by management in such
standards to evaluate job performance. As such it would provide the
basis for arbitral view of the content of performance standards and
would permit arbitrators to substitute their judgements as to the proper
content of performance standards for that of the Agency. Thus, the
disputed provision in this case is to the same effect as a disputed
portion of a proposal found to be outside the duty to bargain in
American Federation of Government Employees, Local 32 and Office of
Personnel Management, Washington, D.C., 16 FLRA 948 (1984) (Proposal 3).
In that decision the Authority held that the disputed portion of a
proposal which provided that "performance standards . . . must be fair
and equitable" violated management's rights to assign work and direct
employees under section 7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Statute. Based on
Office of Personnel Management and the cases cited therein, this
provision, to the extent that it requires an arbitrator to determine
whether performance standards themselves are fair and reasonable, is
also outside the duty to bargain. See also American Federation of
Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 32 and Office of Personnel
Management, 17 FLRA 790 (1985) (Proposal 3).
IV. Order
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., July 15, 1986.
/s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
/s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY