24:0037(4)CA - Philadelphia Naval Shipyard and Philadelphia Metal Trades Council -- 1986 FLRAdec CA

 24 FLRA No. 4
 
 PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 PHILADELPHIA METAL TRADES COUNCIL
 Charging Party
 
                                     Case No. 2-CA-40243 
                                      (19 FLRA No. 107)
 
                       DECISION AND ORDER ON REMAND
 
                         I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to a remand from the
 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
 The question before the Authority is whether it is an unfair labor
 practice under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute
 (the Statute) for the Respondent (Agency) to refuse a request, made
 pursuant to section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, to provide the Charging
 Party (Union) with the names and home addresses of employees in a
 bargaining unit which the Union exclusively represents.
 
    In a recent Decision and Order on Remand in another case, Farmers
 Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA No. 101
 (1986) (FHAFO), we reviewed the Authority's previous decision concerning
 the release of the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees
 to exclusive representatives.  We concluded that the release of the
 information is not prohibited by law, is necessary for unions to fulfill
 their duties under the Statute, and meets all of the other requirements
 established by section 7114(b)(4).  We also determined that the release
 of the information is generally required without regard to whether
 alternative means of communication are available.  Consistent with our
 decision on remand in FHAFO, we conclude that Respondent's refusal to
 provide the Union with the names and home addresses sought in this case
 violated section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute.  We therefore
 vacate the Authority's previous decision in this case.
 
                                II.  Facts
 
    The Union requested the names and home addresses of the unit
 employees it represents.  The Respondent denied the request.  The
 Respondent took the position that release of the information was not
 necessary because the Union had adequate alternative means available for
 communicating with the unit employees through Union stewards, bulletin
 boards, publication of items in the Respondent's newspaper, and
 distribution of literature within the Shipyard.
 
                 III.  Administrative Law Judge's Decision
 
    The Judge concluded that the Respondent failed to comply with the
 requirements of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute in violation of
 section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute when it refused to
 provide the Union, upon request, with the names and home addresses of
 all unit employees represented by the exclusive representative.  The
 Judge found that an exclusive representative must be able to communicate
 effectively with its constituency;  that the exclusive representative's
 access to the addresses of unit employees was necessary for it to carry
 out its representational responsibilities in collective bargaining
 because it had no other effective means of communication with the
 employees;  and that the Privacy Act /*/ was not a bar to disclosure of
 the information.
 
                       IV.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The parties' positions were set forth in the Respondent's exceptions
 and the General Counsel's response in the original case.  The Respondent
 contended that it acted properly in denying the Union's request for the
 names and home addresses of employees because the Union's request did
 not specify why home addresses were necessary within the meaning of
 section 7114(b)(4).  The Respondent maintained that a request which
 states that home addresses are necessary because such information will
 enable the Union to better perform its general representational
 responsibilities is not specific enough to warrant the release of home
 addresses.  The Respondent also contended that the Union had other
 appropriate means available for communicating with unit employees, and
 it excepted to the Judge's conclusion that the alternative means were
 inadequate.  Finally, the Respondent argued that the disclosure of home
 addresses would constitute an invasion of employee privacy in violation
 of the Privacy Act.
 
    The Counsel for the General Counsel argued that the factual and legal
 conclusions of the Judge were correct and urged the Authority to affirm
 the Judge's decision.
 
                  V.  Previous Decision of the Authority
 
    In its previous decision in this case, Philadelphia Naval Shipyard,
 19 FLRA No. 107 (1985), the Authority followed the precedent established
 in the original FHAFO case, 19 FLRA No. 21 (1985).  The Authority
 concluded that the release of home addresses was not required pursuant
 to section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute because the disclosure of such
 information was "prohibited by law," specifically the Privacy Act.  The
 Union appealed.  Philadelphia Metal Trades Council v. FLRA, No. 85-1625
 (D.C. Cir.).  The Authority requested that the court remand the case.
 The Authority also sought remand from the courts in FHAFO and two other
 cases which had been appealed and presented substantially identical
 issues.  The courts granted the Authority's requests in the FHAFO case,
 American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3354 v. FLRA, No.
 85-1493 (D.C. Cir.) (reviewing 19 FLRA No. 21);  in National Federation
 of Federal Employees, Local 1827 v. FLRA, No. 2202 (8th Cir.) (reviewing
 19 FLRA No. 85);  and in this case.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
 Second Circuit, however, denied the Authority's remand request in one
 case, Social Security Administration Northeastern Program Service
 Center, 19 FLRA No. 108 (1985), and issued a decision.  The Second
 Circuit reversed the Authority's holding that the release of names and
 home addresses was "prohibited by law," i.e., the Privacy Act, under
 section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute.  American Federation of Government
 Employees, Local 1760 v. FLRA, 786 F.2d 554 (2nd Cir. 1986).  The
 Authority then decided to review the entire issue of the release of
 employees' names and home addresses and invited agencies, unions, and
 interested persons to submit amicus briefs addressing the issue.  A
 number of amicus submissions were received.  Although the parties in
 this case did not submit amicus briefs, the Navy Department and the
 American Federation of Government Employees did file amicus briefs
 outlining their positions.
 
                       VI.  Analysis and Conclusions
 
    As noted above, the Authority in the decision on remand in FHAFO
 concluded that the release of the names and home addresses of bargaining
 unit employees to the exclusive representative of those employees is not
 prohibited by law, is necessary for unions to fulfill their duties under
 the Statute and meets the other requirements of section 7114(b)(4).  We
 also determined that agencies are required to furnish such information
 without regard to whether alternative means of communication are
 available or adequate.  Based on our decision on remand in the FHAFO
 case, we find that the Respondent in this case was required to furnish
 the Union with the names and home addresses of the employees in the
 bargaining unit.  We conclude that the Respondent's refusal to furnish
 the requested information constituted a violation of section 7116(a)(1),
 (5) and (8) of the Statute.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
 and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute, it is ordered that the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard,
 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
    (a) Refusing to furnish, upon request by the Philadelphia Metal
 Trades Council, the exclusive representative of its employees, the names
 and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it
 represents.
 
    (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
 coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by the
 Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Statute:
 
    (a) Upon request by the Philadelphia Metal Trades Council, the
 exclusive representative of its employees, furnish it with the names and
 home addresses of employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
 
    (b) Post at all its facilities where bargaining unit employees
 represented by the Philadelphia Metal Trades Council are located, copies
 of the attached Notice on forms to be furnished by the Federal Labor
 Relations Authority.  Upon receipt of such forms, they shall be signed
 by a senior official of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Philadelphia,
 Pennsylvania, and shall be posted and maintained for 60 consecutive days
 thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards and
 other places where notices to employees are customarily posted.
 Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure that such Notices are not
 altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
 
    (c) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Region II, Federal Labor
 Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this
 Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., November 13, 1986.
 
                                       /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
                                       /s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       /s/ Jean McKee, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
                ---------------  FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
 
    (*) Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. Section 552a (1982).
 
 
 
 
 
                                 APPENDIX
 
                          NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
 
  PURSUANT TO A DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR
 RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF CHAPTER 71
 OF TITLE
 5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS
 WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
 
    WE WILL NOT refuse to furnish, upon request by the Philadelphia Metal
 Trades Council, the exclusive representative of our employees, the names
 and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it
 represents.
 
    WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain,
 or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by
 the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
 
    WE WILL, upon request by the Philadelphia Metal Trades Council, the
 exclusive representative of our employees, furnish it with the names and
 home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
                                       (Activity)
 
    Dated:  By:  (Signature) (Title)
 
    This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date
 of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other
 material.
 
    If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance
 with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional
 Director, Region II, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address
 is:  26 Federal Plaza, Room 3700, New York, N.Y. 10278 and whose
 telephone number is:  (212) 264-4934.