U.S. Air Force Military Airlift Command, 76 Military Airlift Wing, 76 Air Base Group, Andrews Air Force Base, Washington, DC (Activity/Petitioner) and 14th District Council of Air Force Locals, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (Exclusive Representative)

 2 FLRA No. 83
 
 U.S. AIR FORCE MILITARY AIRLIFT
 COMMAND, 76 MILITARY AIRLIFT WING,
 76 AIR BASE GROUP, ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE,
 WASHINGTON, D.C.  /1/
 Activity/Petitioner
 
 and
 
 14TH DISTRICT COUNCIL OF AIR FORCE LOCALS,
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 AFL-CIO
 Exclusive Representative
 
                                            Assistant Secretary
                                            Case No. 22-09518(CU)
 
                    DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT
 
    UPON A PETITION DULY FILED UNDER SECTION 6 OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491,
 AS AMENDED, A HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE HEARING OFFICER DONALD J. BRIZZI.
 THE HEARING OFFICER'S RULINGS MADE AT THE HEARING ARE FREE FROM
 PREJUDICIAL ERROR AND ARE HEREBY AFFIRMED.
 
    THE FUNCTIONS OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR FOR
 LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS, UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED,
 WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 304 OF REORGANIZATION
 PLAN NO. 2 OF 1978 (43 F.R. 36040), WHICH TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS IS
 IMPLEMENTED BY SECTION 2400.2 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS
 (44 F.R. 44741, JULY 30, 1979).  THE AUTHORITY CONTINUES TO BE
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THESE FUNCTIONS AS PROVIDED IN
 SECTION 7135(B) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
 STATUTE (92 STAT. 1215).
 
    UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING BRIEFS FILED BY BOTH
 PARTIES, THE AUTHORITY FINDS:
 
    THE ACTIVITY FILED A PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OF UNIT (CU) SEEKING
 TO CLARIFY A UNIT REPRESENTED BY 14TH DISTRICT COUNCIL OF AIR FORCE
 LOCALS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO (AFGE).
 /2/ SPECIFICALLY, THE ACTIVITY SEEKS TO EXCLUDE FROM THE UNIT EMPLOYEES
 IN THE FOLLOWING JOB DESCRIPTIONS:  AIRCRAFT HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS MECHANIC,
 WG-8268-11;  AIRCRAFT PROPELLER MECHANIC, WG-8554-11;  AIRCRAFT INTEGRAL
 TANK SEALER, WG-8871-11;  PAINTER, WG-4102-11;  PNEUDRAULIC SYSTEMS
 MECHANIC, WG-8255-12;  SHEET METAL MECHANIC (AIRCRAFT), WG-3806-12;
 AIRCRAFT MECHANIC, WG-8852-11;  FABRIC WORKER, WG-3105-09;  AND AIRCRAFT
 ELECTRICIAN, WG-2892-11.  THE ACTIVITY CONTENDS THAT THE EMPLOYEES IN
 THESE POSITIONS, KNOWN AS SMALL SHOP CHIEFS, ARE SUPERVISORY, AND, IN
 ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2(C) OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED,
 SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE BARGAINING UNIT.  THE AFGE CONTENDS THAT THE
 SMALL SHOP CHIEFS ARE NOT SUPERVISORS, BUT MERELY WORK LEADERS WITH
 TECHNICAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN THEIR SHOP, AND SHOULD REMAIN IN THE UNIT.
 
    THE POSITIONS IN QUESTION, WHICH ARE LOCATED IN THE 459TH TACTICAL
 AIRLIFT WING (TAW), ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, WASHINGTON, D.C., ARE ALL
 REFERRED TO AS "SMALL SHOP CHIEF" POSITIONS, AND ARE ALL REQUIRED TO BE
 MANNED BY AIR RESERVE TECHNICIANS (ART).  THE TAW IS A TENANT ACTIVITY
 OF THE ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE, AND IS SERVICED BY THE 76 AIR BASE GROUP,
 CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE.  THE TAW IS AN AIR FORCE RESERVE (AFRES) UNIT
 RESPONSIBLE FOR FLYING AND MAINTAINING EIGHT C-130 AIRCRAFT, AND
 ALTHOUGH AN AFRES UNIT, ITS ORGANIZATION IS SIMILAR TO AN ACTIVE DUTY
 UNIT.  THE NINE SMALL SHOP CHIEF POSITIONS IN QUESTION ARE LOCATED IN
 THE FIELD MAINTENANCE BRANCH AND AVIONICS BRANCH OF THE 459 MAINTENANCE
 SQUADRON OF THE TAW.  EACH BRANCH IS HEADED BY A SUPERINTENDENT AND IS
 ORGANIZED INTO FOUR SECTIONS, EACH HEADED BY A FOREMAN.  /3/ EACH
 SECTION IS FURTHER ORGANIZED INTO SHOPS, WHICH ARE HEADED BY THE SMALL
 SHOP CHIEFS, WHICH HAVE ONE OR TWO JOURNEYMEN MECHANICS.  THE SMALL SHOP
 CHIEFS ARE AT LEAST ONE GRADE HIGHER THAN THE JOURNEYMEN THAT WORK FOR
 THEM.
 
    THE SMALL SHOP CHIEFS' DUTIES AS NOTED IN THEIR JOB DESCRIPTIONS
 INCLUDE;  SCHEDULING WORK;  PLANNING WORK FOR MILITARY RESERVISTS
 ASSIGNED TO THEIR SHOP;  ASSIGNING TASKS ON A JOB;  PROVIDING TECHNICAL
 ASSISTANCE;  ENSURING EQUIPMENT, TOOLS AND PARTS ARE AVAILABLE,
 REVIEWING WORK IN PROGRESS;  MAKING FINAL INSPECTION OF WORK;  TAKING
 TIME AND ATTENDANCE;  MAKING APPRAISALS OF SUBORDINATES;  PREPARING
 LEAVE SCHEDULES AND OBTAINING APPROVAL OF SAME FROM SUPERVISOR AND
 RECOMMENDING TO SUPERVISOR ON SELECTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES, REASSIGNMENT,
 PROMOTIONS, STEP INCREASES AND DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS.  EACH SMALL SHOP
 CHIEF IS THE HIGHEST QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL IN THE UNIQUE TECHNOLOGY OR
 SKILL WHICH IS THE SPECIALTY OF HIS SHOP AND RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ACTIONS
 CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF HIS SHOP.  /4/
 
    THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONFUSION WITHIN THE ACTIVITY CONCERNING THE
 DUTIES OF THE SMALL SHOP CHIEFS.  THE RECORD INDICATES THAT FIVE /5/ OF
 THE NINE SMALL SHOP CHIEFS HAVE EXERCISED ALL THE DUTIES OUTLINED IN
 THEIR JOB DESCRIPTIONS, INCLUDING EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDING HIRING OF
 EMPLOYEES, GIVING PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS OF SUBORDINATES, AND
 EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDING DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS, PROMOTIONS, AND AWARDS.
 THE OTHER SMALL SHOP CHIEFS, EXCEPT FOR SPORADIC OCCASIONS, WERE, UNTIL
 RECENTLY, PRECLUDED FROM EXERCISING THEIR SUPERVISORY FUNCTIONS BY
 EITHER THEIR BRANCH SUPERINTENDENT OR SECTION CHIEF.  THE RECORD FURTHER
 INDICATES THAT WHEN THIS SITUATION CAME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE
 ACTIVITY, MEMOS AND DIRECTIVES WERE ISSUED TO THE BRANCH SUPERINTENDENTS
 AND SECTION CHIEFS REMINDING THEM THAT THE SMALL SHOP CHIEFS WERE
 SUPERVISORS, AND THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTIES
 AS STATED IN THEIR JOB DESCRIPTIONS.  THE RECORD DISCLOSED THAT AFTER
 THESE MEMOS AND DIRECTIVES HAD BEEN ISSUED, THE SMALL SHOP CHIEFS WERE
 INFORMED BY THEIR SECTION CHIEFS THAT THEY WERE NOW RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL
 SUPERVISORY DUTIES FOUND IN THEIR JOB DESCRIPTIONS.
 
    SECTION 2(C) OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED, DEFINES A
 SUPERVISOR AS ". . . AN EMPLOYEE HAVING AUTHORITY . . . TO HIRE,
 TRANSFER, SUSPEND, LAY OFF, RECALL, PROMOTE, DISCHARGE, ASSIGN, REWARD,
 OR DISCIPLINE OTHER EMPLOYEES, OR RESPONSIBILITY TO DIRECT THEM, OR TO
 ADJUST THEIR GRIEVANCES, OR EFFECTIVELY TO RECOMMEND SUCH ACTION, IF IN
 CONNECTION WITH THE FOREGOING THE EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY IS NOT OF A
 MERELY ROUTINE OR CLERICAL NATURE, BUT REQUIRES THE USE OF INDEPENDENT
 JUDGMENT, . . ." IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS COUNCIL
 (FLRC) THAT SUPERVISORY STATUS WAS INTENDED TO BE DETERMINED ON THE
 BASIS OF AN INDIVIDUAL'S AUTHORITY, NOT ON THE BASIS OF THE NUMBER OF
 SUBORDINATES, /6/ AND THAT, BECAUSE THE DEFINITION OF SUPERVISOR IS
 WRITTEN IN THE DISJUNCTIVE, ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO POSSESSES THE AUTHORITY
 TO PERFORM A SINGLE FUNCTION DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2(C) OF THE ORDER,
 PROVIDING HE DOES SO UTILIZING INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT, IS A SUPERVISOR.
 /7/
 
    UNDER ALL THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE
 EMPLOYEES IN THE SUBJECT JOB CLASSIFICATION ARE SUPERVISORS WITHIN THE
 MEANING OF SECTION 2(C) OF THE ORDER.  /8/ THUS, THE RECORD CLEARLY
 ESTABLISHES THAT EMPLOYEES IN THESE CLASSIFICATIONS ARE AUTHORIZED, AND
 EITHER HAVE OR WILL BE REQUIRED TO EXERCISE THE AUTHORITY, TO
 EFFECTIVELY RECOMMEND THE HIRING OF EMPLOYEES, DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS,
 PROMOTIONS AND AWARDS, AND TO ADJUST GRIEVANCES.  ACCORDINGLY, THE
 AUTHORITY SHALL ORDER THAT EMPLOYEES IN THE DISPUTED JOB CLASSIFICATION
 BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXCLUSIVELY REPRESENTED UNIT.  /9/
 
                                   ORDER
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT TO BE CLARIFIED HEREIN FOR
 WHICH THE 14TH DISTRICT COUNCIL OF AIR FORCE LOCALS, AMERICAN FEDERATION
 OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO WAS CERTIFIED ON NOVEMBER 3, 1977, BE,
 AND IT HEREBY IS, CLARIFIED BY EXCLUDING FROM THE UNIT THE EMPLOYEES IN
 THE FOLLOWING POSITIONS:  AIRCRAFT HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS MECHANIC,
 WG-8268-11;  AIRCRAFT PROPELLER MECHANIC, WG-8554-11;  AIRCRAFT INTEGRAL
 TANK SEALER, WG-8871-11;  PAINTER, WG-4102-11;  PNEUDRAULIC SYSTEMS
 MECHANIC, WG-8255-12;  SHEET METAL MECHANIC (AIRCRAFT), WG-3806-12;
 AIRCRAFT MECHANIC, WG-8852-11;  FABRIC WORKER, WG-3105-09;  AND AIRCRAFT
 ELECTRICIAN, WG-2892-11.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., FEBRUARY 21, 1980
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
    /1/ THE NAME OF THE ACTIVITY APPEARS AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
 
    /2/ THE AFGE WAS CERTIFIED AS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE ON
 NOVEMBER 3, 1977, IN CASE NO. 22-07992(UC), IN A UNIT DEFINED AS
 FOLLOWS:
 
    ALL WAGE GRADE EMPLOYEES ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE;  ALL GENERAL
 SCHEDULE AND WAGE GRADE
 
    EMPLOYEES BOLLING AIR FORCE BASE;  ALL GENERAL SCHEDULE AND WAGE
 GRADE EMPLOYEES IN
 
    "OFF-BASE" ORGANIZATIONS ATTACHED TO BOLLING AIR FORCE BASE FOR
 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT;  ALL
 
    GENERAL SCHEDULE EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO DET. 29 SAN ANTONIO AIR
 LOGISTIC CENTER, CAMERON
 
    STATION, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA, ALL WHICH ARE SERVICED BY THE ANDREWS
 AIR FORCE BASE CENTRAL
 
    CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE, EXCLUDING SUPERVISORS, PROFESSIONALS, AND
 MANAGEMENT OFFICALS,
 
    EMPLOYEES INCLUDED IN OTHER UNITS OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION AT ANDREWS
 OR BOLLING AIR FORCE
 
    BASE, EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN FEDERAL PERSONNEL IN OTHER THAN A PURELY
 CLERICAL CAPACITY,
 
    CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES, GUARDS, TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES WITH APPOINTMENTS
 OF 90 DAYS OR LESS WITH
 
    NO EXPECTATION OF REAPPOINTMENT AND THE 1035TH TECHNICAL OPERATIONS
 GROUP.
 
    /3/ THE FOREMAN IS ALSO KNOWN AS A SECTION CHIEF.
 
    /4/ SMALL SHOP CHIEF POSITIONS ARE UNIQUE, IN THAT, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE
 ASSIGNED CERTAIN SUPERVISORY DUTIES, THEY ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS WS
 EMPLOYEES BECAUSE UNDER OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT RULES, AN
 EMPLOYEE CAN NOT BE CLASSIFIED A WS UNLESS HE SUPERVISES AT LEAST THREE
 EMPLOYEES.
 
    /5/ TWO OF THESE MEN HAD RECENTLY BEEN PROMOTED TO SMALL SHOP CHIEFS.
  HOWEVER, THEY HAD BOTH WORKED FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE PREDECESSORS, AND
 TESTIFIED AS TO THE DUTIES PERFORMED BY THOSE MEN.
 
    /6/ SEE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, NORTHERN MARKETING
 AND RESEARCH DIVISION, PEORIA, ILLINOIS, 1 FLRC 294 (1973).
 
    /7/ UNITED STATES NAVAL WEAPONS CENTER, CHINA LAKE, CALIFORNIA, 1
 FLRC 404 (1973).
 
    /8/ DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, SOCIAL SECURITY
 ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS, REGION II, PUERTO RICO,
 1 FLRA NO. 110 (1979).
 
    /9/ IN CONFORMITY WITH SECTION 902(B) OF THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT
 OF 1978 (92 STAT. 1224), THE PRESENT CASE IS DECIDED SOLELY ON THE BASIS
 OF E.O. 11491, AS AMENDED, AND AS IF THE NEW FEDERAL SERVICE
 LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (92 STAT. 1191) HAD NOT BEEN ENACTED.
  THE DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT DOES NOT PREJUDGE IN ANY MANNER
 EITHER THE MEANING OR APPLICATION OF RELATED PROVISIONS IN THE NEW
 STATUTE OR THE RESULT WHICH WOULD BE REACHED BY THE AUTHORITY IF THE
 CASE HAD ARISEN UNDER THE STATUTE RATHER THAN THE EXECUTIVE ORDER.