23:0804(103)NG - FUSE, NAGE, Local R1-144 and Navy, Naval Underwater Systems Center -- 1986 FLRAdec NG
[ v23 p804 ]
23:0804(103)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
23 FLRA No. 103
FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND
ENGINEERS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-144
Union
and
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF NAVY, NAVAL
UNDERWATER SYSTEMS CENTER
Agency
Case No. 0-NG-1267
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
I. Statement of the Case
The petition for review in this case comes 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. It
raises an issue concerning the negotiability of one Union Proposal to
grant "super seniority" to Union officials and stewards in a
reduction-in-force. For the following reasons we hold that the proposal
is nonnegotiable.
II. Union Proposal
Union officials and stewards shall for the purposes of
reduction-in-force during their official tenure of office be
considered the most senior employees in their competitive level
and tenure status.
III. Positions of the Parties
The Agency contends that this proposal conflicts with management's
right under section 7106(a)(2)(A) to remove employees in that it would
compel the Agency to remove other employees before removing union
officials and stewards in a reduction-in-force (RIF). Additionally, it
argues that the proposal is inconsistent with a Government-wide rule or
regulation -- specifically, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
regulations found at 5 CFR Part 351.
The Union disputes the Agency's assertion that this proposal is
nonnegotiable. It asserts that there is no Agency regulation for which
a compelling need exists which bars negotiation of this proposal. /1/
IV. Analysis and Conclusions
A. The Proposal Conflicts with a Management Right
This proposal would require that, in a RIF, the Agency consider union
officials and stewards to be senior to all other employees who are in
the same competitive level and have the same tenure status. Absent any
contrary statement by the Union, we interpret the terms "competitive
level" and "tenure status" in this proposal as having the same
respective meanings ascribed to the terms "competitive level" and
"tenure group" in the OPM regulations governing RIF's. /2/ "Competitive
level" is a grouping of positions based on their similarity. Employees
are placed in a "tenure group" based on the nature of their appointment,
for example, career, career-conditional, or indefinite. In American
Federation of Government Employees, Local 2612, AFL-CIO and Department
of the Air Force, Headquarters, 416th Combat Support Group (SAC),
Griffiss Air Force Base, New York, 19 FLRA No. 117 (1985) (Union
Proposal 2), the Authority held nonnegotiable a proposal requiring union
officers and stewards to be the last employees in a given job
classificaation to be removed in the event of a RIF. The Authority
reasoned that the proposal would violate the agency's right to remove
employees under section 7106(a)(2)(A) by compelling first removal of
employees who were not union officials and stewards. This proposal is
to the same effect. In a RIF action it would, similarly to the proposal
in Griffiss AFB, compel the Agency to remove other employees in a given
competitive level and tenure group prior to removing Union officers and
stewards. For the reasons stated in Griffiss AFB and the cases cited in
that decision, the Authority finds that this proposal directly
interferes with the Agency's right under section 7106(a)(2)(A) to remove
employees.
B. The Proposal Conflicts with a Government-wide Rule or
Regulation
The OPM RIF regulations prescribe several specific criteria by which
employees must be ranked for purposes of determining their relative
retention standing within a competitive level. 5 CFR Sections
351.501-351.506 (1986). Under those regulations an employee's retention
standing is determined by the combination of tenure group, subgroup
(veterans preference status), length of service and annual performance
ratings. Because the proposal would award greatest seniority within a
tenure group to Union officials and stewards, based on their union
office, it is inconsistent with these regulations. National Treasury
Employees Union, NTEU Chapter 202 and Department of the Treasury, Bureau
of Government Financial Operations, 22 FLRA No. 58 (1986). The proposal
is, therefore, not within the duty to bargain.
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., October 31, 1986.
/s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
/s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
/s/ Jean McKee, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
(1) The Agency does not assert before us that negotiations on the
proposal are barred by an Agency regulation. Therefore, we need not
further address this Union claim.
(2) 5 CFR Part 351 and FPM Letter 351-20, subchapter 3.