32:0551(81)CA - - Bureau of Engraving and Printing and IAM - - 1988 FLRAdec CA - - v32 p551



[ v32 p551 ]
32:0551(81)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


32 FLRA No. 81

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

 

BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AND PRINTING

Respondent

and 

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS

Charging Party

Case Nos. 3-CA-80059

3-CA-80060

 

DECISION AND ORDER

I. Statement of the Case

These unfair labor practice cases are before the Authority in accordance with section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, based on a stipulation of facts by the parties.

The consolidated complaint alleges that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (the Respondent) violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by failing and refusing to provide the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Columbia Lodge No. 174 and Franklin Lodge 2135 (the Charging Party or Union) with the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees. For the reasons stated below, we find that the Respondent committed the unfair labor practice as alleged.

II. Facts

Columbia Lodge No. 174, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, is the exclusive representative of Respondent's non-supervisory, non-craft wage system employees. By letter dated June 12, 1987, the Union requested that the Respondent furnish it with a list of the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees it represented. By letter dated June 25, 1987, the Respondent refused to provide the Union with the names and home addresses.

Franklin Lodge No. 2135, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, is the exclusive representative of Respondent's machinists craft employees. By letter dated June 12, 1987, the Union requested that the Respondent furnish it with a list of the names and home address of bargaining unit employees it represented. By letter dated July 25, 1987, the Respondent refused to provide the Union with the names and home addresses.

The parties stipulated that the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees are normally maintained by Respondent in the regular course of business, are reasonably available and do not constitute guidance, counsel or training provided for management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining.

III. Positions of the Parties

The General Counsel argues that an exclusive representative is entitled under section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute to the names and home addresses of the employees it represents, that the release of such data is not prohibited by the Privacy Act, that such information is to be provided regardless of whether alternative means of communication are available to the exclusive representative and that the exclusive representative need offer no explanation as to the reasons why it seeks such information. The General Counsel asserts that Respondent's admitted failure to furnish the names and home addresses to the Locals of the Union constitutes a clear violation of section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute.

The Respondent did not file a brief.

IV. Analysis and Conclusion

In the Authority's Decision and Order on Remand in Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA 788 (1986) (Farmers Home), enforced in part and remanded sub nom. U.S. Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri v. FLRA, 836 F.2d 1139 (8th Cir. 1988), the Authority concluded that the release of the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees to their exclusive representatives 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) of the Statute. The Authority also determined that the release of the information is generally required without regard to whether alternative means of communication are available. Further, from the parties' stipulation, it is evident that the other requirements of section 7114(b)(4)(A), (B), and (C) have been met in this case.

Based on the parties' stipulation and the Authority's decision on remand in Farmers Home, we find that the Respondent was required to furnish the Charging Party with the names and home addresses of employees in the bargaining units. The Respondent's refusal to do so violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute. See also United States Department of the Navy and Philadelphia Naval Shipyard v. FLRA, 840 F.2d 1131 (3d Cir. 1988), enforcing Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, 24 FLRA 37 (1986); U.S. Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois v. FLRA, 838 F.2d 229 (7th Cir. 1988), affirming Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois v. FLRA, 24 FLRA 226 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration v. FLRA, 833 F.2d 1129 (4th Cir. 1987), affirming Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, 24 FLRA 543 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration and Social Security Administration Field Operations, New York Region, 24 FLRA 583 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, 24 FLRA 600 (1986).

ORDER

Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing shall:

1. Cease and desist from:

(a) Refusing to furnish, upon request of Columbia Lodge No. 174, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of Respondent's non-supervisory, non-craft wage system employees, and Franklin Lodge N