Please note that Friday, January 20, 2017, is a federal holiday for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.  The following FLRA offices will not be open to accept in-person case filings or to respond to phone calls on that day:  the Authority’s Case Intake and Publication Office, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the Washington Regional Office, OGC Headquarters (Appeals), and the Federal Service Impasses Panel.  The FLRA’s eFiling System remains available.         

28:0757(96)CU - NFFE, LOCAL 1214 VS ARMY, ARMY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL,



[ v28 p757 ]
28:0757(96)CU
The decision of the Authority follows:


28 FLRA NO. 96



DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY
MONCRIEF ARMY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
FORT JACKSON, SOUTH CAROLINA

                   Activity

      and

LOCAL 1214, NATIONAL FEDERATION
OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

                   Petitioner

Case No. 4-CU-70008

ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

On July 2, 1987, the Department of the Army, Department of Pathology, Moncrief Army Community Hospital, Fort Jackson, South Carolina (the Activity) filed a timely application for review pursuant to section 2422.17(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, seeking to set aside the Regional Director's Decision and Order on Petition for Clarification of Unit in the above-named case. In the Decision and Order, the Regional Director found that the incumbents in the position of Medical Technologist are not "professional employees" within the meaning of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute and that the Petitioner's existing unit of recognition should therefore be clarified as requested to include Medical Technologists. In its application for review, the Activity contends, in essence, that compelling reasons exist within the meaning of section 2422.17(c) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations for granting the application. Specifically, the Activity contends that the Regional Director has departed from Authority precedent and that the decision was clearly erroneous on substantial factual issues. On consideration of the Activity's application for review, we conclude that no compelling reason exists for granting the application. The Regional Director's decision has not been shown to raise a substantial question of law or policy because of a departure from Authority precedent, or to be clearly erroneous on a substantial factual issue so as to have prejudicially affected the rights of any party.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 2422.17(f)(3) of our Rules and Regulations, the application for review of the Regional Director's Decision and Order on Petition for Clarification of unit is denied.

Issued, Washington, D.C., August 28, 1987

Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman

Henry B. Frazier III, Member

Jean McKee, Member

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY