25:0728(60)AC - Florida NG, St. Augustine, FL and NAGE Local R5-107, SEIU -- 1987 FLRAdec RP
[ v25 p728 ]
25:0728(60)AC
The decision of the Authority follows:
25 FLRA No. 60
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA
Activity
and
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL R5-107, SEIU,AFL-CIO
Union
Case No. 4-AC-60011
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
I. Statement of the Case
This case is before the Authority on an application filed by the
Union under section 2422.17(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
for review of the Regional Director's decision and order on the Union's
petition for amendment of certification.
II. Regional Director's Decision
The Union's petition sought to amend the certification issued in Case
No. 42-1244 to reflect a change in the name of the representative from
National Association of Government Employees, Local R5-120 to National
Association of Government Employees, Local R5-107. The Regional
Director dismissed the Union's petition. She determined that in order
to assure that a petition for amendment of certification based on a
merger of locals accurately reflects the desires of the membership,
certain procedures must be followed. The procedures that she set forth
were based on a decision issued under E.O. 11491: Veterans
Administration Hospital, Montrose, New York, 4 A/SLMR 858 (1974), review
denied, 3 FLRC 259 (1975). She also cited in support of the procedures
she set forth the unpublished decision of the Authority in U.S. Army
Armament Research and Development Command, Case No. 2-AC-1 (July 30,
1980).
III. Application for Review
In its application the Union contends that compelling reasons exist
within the meaning of the Authority's Rules for granting the
application. Specifically, the Union contends under section
2422.17(c)(1) that a substantial question of law or policy is raised
because of an absence of Authority precedent for the Regional Director's
decision. The Union argues that a substantial question of law or policy
is raised for two reasons. The Union first argues that the procedures
which were set forth in VA Hospital, Montrose apply only to a change in
affiliation; they do not apply to a merger of two local unions of the
same national union. Secondly, the Union argues that there is no
published precedent of the Authority supporting the Regional Director's
decision.
IV. Analysis and Conclusion
We conclude that no substantial question of law or policy has been
raised and that consequently no compelling reasons exist within the
meaning of section 2422.17(c) for granting the Union's application for
review. In particular, we conclude that no substantial question of law
or policy is raised by the Regional Director's application to the
Union's petition of procedures that originally had been applied to a
change in affiliation. The unpublished decision of the Authority in
U.S. Army Research and Development Command, Case No. 2-AC-1 (July 30,
1980), supports the application of such procedures to a merger of locals
of the same national union. Moreover, the private-sector practice is to
apply generally the same procedures to both mergers and affiliation
changes. The National Labor Relations Board has generally applied, with
court approval, for example, NLRB v. Commercial Letter, Inc., 496 F.2d
35 (8th Cir. 1974), the same procedures to mergers as it has applied to
changes in affiliation, for example, F. W. Woolworth Co., 268 NLRB 805,
806 (1984).
We likewise conclued that no substantial question of law or policy is
raised by reason of the precedent cited by the Regional Director. The
fact that U.S. Army Armament Research and Development Command was not a
published decision does not make the Regional Director's decision lack
precedent. Moreover, with respect to VA Hospital, Montrose, we note
that under section 7135(b) of the Statute, such decision remains in full
force and effect because it has not been revised or superseded by
decisions issued pursuant to the Statute.
V. Order
The application for review of the Regional Director's decision and
order on the Union's petition for amendment of certification is denied.
Issued, Washington, D.C., February 13, 1987.
Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
Jean McKee, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY