Federal Aviation Administration, Airway Facilities Sector, Tulsa, Oklahoma (Activity) and International Association of Machinist and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 2266 (Exclusive Representative) 

 



[ v01 p1046 ]
01:1046(118)RA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 1 FLRA No. 118
 
 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,
 AIRWAY FACILITIES SECTOR,
 TULSA, OKLAHOMA
 Activity
 
 and
 
 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINIST
 AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2266
 Exclusive Representative
 
                                            Assistant Secretary
                                            Case No. 63-8801(RA)
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    UPON A PETITION DULY FILED UNDER SECTION 6 OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491,
 AS AMENDED, A HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE STEVEN E.
 HALPERN.  /1/ THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'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 CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING THE
 BRIEF FILED BY THE ACTIVITY, THE AUTHORITY FINDS:
 
    PRIOR TO A REORGANIZATION OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1978, THE TULSA, OKLAHOMA
 AIRWAY FACILITY SECTOR (TULSA AFS) WAS ONE OF THE 19 AFS'S LOCATED IN
 THE SOUTHWEST REGION OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA).
 SINCE 1966, THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINIST AND AEROSPACE
 WORKERS, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2266 (IAM), HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED AS THE EXCLUSIVE
 REPRESENTATIVE OF ALL ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF THE TULSA AFS.  /2/
 
    EACH AIRWAY FACILITY SECTOR, UNDER THE DIRECTION OF A SECTOR MANAGER,
 IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING AND OPERATING ALL NATIONAL AIRSPACE
 SYSTEM FACILITIES WITHIN ITS GEOGRAPHICAL AREA, ASSURING THAT
 PERFORMANCE IS WITHIN ESTABLISHED TOLERANCES OF ACCURACY AND MEETS
 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF AVAILABILITY AND RELIABILITY, MAINTAINING
 ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT, AND EFFECTIVELY MANAGING
 AVAILABLE RESOURCES.  TO ACCOMPLISH THIS MISSION, EACH SECTOR MANAGER
 HAS A WIDE RANGE OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY WITHIN ESTABLISHED
 GUIDELINES FORMULATED BY THE FAA.  THE EMPLOYEES OF EACH AFS SHARE A
 COMMON MISSION, COMMON OVERALL SUPERVISION, GENERALLY SIMILAR JOB
 CLASSIFICATIONS AND DUTIES, ENJOY UNIFORM PERSONNEL POLICIES AND
 PRACTICES AND ARE SUBJECT TO UNIFORM LABOR RELATIONS POLICIES.  HOWEVER,
 THE BENEFITS ENJOYED BY EMPLOYEES OF EACH AFS MAY VARY DUE TO DIFFERENT
 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS.
 
    ON JULY 13, 1978, THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE FAA APPROVED A
 REORGANIZATION OF SIX AFS'S IN THE SOUTHWEST REGION OF THE FAA,
 EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1978.  AS A RESULT OF THIS REORGANIZATION,
 THE TULSA AFS WAS ABOLISHED, AND ITS GEOGRAPHICAL AREA WAS DIVIDED
 BETWEEN THE OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA AIRWAY FACILITY SECTOR (OKLAHOMA
 CITY AFS) AND THE LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS AIRWAY FACILITY SECTOR (LITTLE
 ROCK AFS.) PURSUANT TO THE REORGANIZATION THE TULSA AFS HEADQUARTERS
 OFFICE WAS ABOLISHED AND THE SECTOR MANAGER AS WELL AS OTHER SUPPORT
 ACTIVITIES AND THEIR EMPLOYEES WERE PHASED OUT.  THE EMPLOYEES LOCATED
 IN THE OFFICES WITHIN THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA WERE ASSIGNED TO THE
 OKLAHOMA CITY AFS.  /3/ THE EMPLOYEES LOCATED IN OFFICES WITHIN THE
 STATE OF ARKANSAS, INCLUDING THE FAYETTEVILLE SECTOR FIELD OFFICE
 (FAYETTEVILLE SFO), HARRISON SECTOR FIELD OFFICE UNIT (HARRISON SFOU),
 AND FORT SMITH SECTOR FIELD OFFICE (FORT SMITH SFO), WERE ASSIGNED TO
 THE LITTLE ROCK AFS.  THE REORGANIZATION ADDED 38 EMPLOYEES TO THE
 OKLAHOMA CITY AFS AND 18 EMPLOYEES TO THE LITTLE ROCK AFS.
 
    UNDER THE REORGANIZATION, THE TULSA AFS BECAME THE TULSA SECOND LEVEL
 SECTOR FIELD OFFICE (TULSA SLSFO), STAFFED BY THE FORMER TULSA AFS
 HEADQUARTERS EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO THE PROFICIENCY AND DEVELOPMENT
 STAFF, THE ELECTRONICS TECHNICAL STAFF, THE RADAR/ARTS UNIT AND THE
 NAV/COM UNIT.  UNDER THE NEW ORGANIZATION THE PONCA CITY SFOU, THE ENID
 SFO AND THE BARTLESVILLE SFOU REPORT DIRECTLY TO THE SECTOR MANAGER,
 OKLAHOMA CITY AFS, WHILE THE MCALISTER (SFOU) AND THE CHELSEA (SFOU)
 REPORT TO FIRST LEVEL SUPERVISORS IN THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED TULSA SLSFO.
 IN TURN THE CHIEF OF THE TULSA SLSFO, REPORTS TO THE SECTOR MANAGER,
 OKLAHOMA CITY AFS.  WHEREAS THE OKLAHOMA CITY AFS SECTOR MANAGER IS
 AUTHORIZED TO EXERCISE A WIDE RANGE OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY AS TO
 PERSONNEL MATTERS, THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF THE TULSA SLSFO, AS A
 SECOND LEVEL SUPERVISOR, IS QUITE LIMITED, AS IN FACT HE IS NOT
 AUTHORIZED TO INITIATE OR TO DECIDE ADVERSE ACTIONS, RESOLVE FORMAL
 GRIEVANCES UNDER THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE PROVIDED IN THE COLLECTIVE
 BARGAINING AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE ACTIVITY AND THE IAM, NOR NEGOTIATE A
 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT.
 
    THE 56 FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE TULSA AFS, INCLUDING THOSE EMPLOYEES
 NOW ASSIGNED TO THE TULSA SLSFO, ARE BOUND BY THE PERSONNEL PRACTICES
 AND WORKING CONDITIONS, AND ARE UNDER THE OVERALL SUPERVISION OF THE
 SECTOR MANAGERS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AFS'S IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE
 OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THOSE AFS'S.
 
    THE ACTIVITY CONTENDS THAT, DUE TO A REORGANIZATION OCCURRING ON
 SEPTEMBER 10, 1978, THE CHARACTER AND SCOPE OF THE BARGAINING UNIT
 REPRESENTED BY THE IAM SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED, AND THE UNIT IS NO LONGER
 APPROPRIATE FOR PURPOSES OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION.  THE ACTIVITY ALSO
 CONTENDS THAT THOSE FORMER TULSA AFS EMPLOYEES REASSIGNED TO THE LITTLE
 ROCK AFS SHOULD BE ACCRETED TO THE BARGAINING UNIT REPRESENTED BY THE
 FEDERAL AVIATION SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL ASSOCIATION, AFFILIATED WITH THE
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (FASTA/NAGE), AND THOSE
 REASSIGNED TO THE OKLAHOMA CITY AFS SHOULD BE ACCRETED TO THE BARGAINING
 UNIT REPRESENTED BY THE PROFESSIONAL AIRWAYS SYSTEM SPECIALISTS (PASS).
 ALTHOUGH THE IAM CONCEDES THAT THE EMPLOYEES REASSIGNED TO THE LITTLE
 ROCK AFS NO LONGER SHARE A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST WITH THE OTHER
 EMPLOYEES OF ITS BARGAINING UNIT, IT CONTENDS THAT, DESPITE THE
 REORGANIZATION, THERE STILL EXISTS AN APPROPRIATE UNIT, CONSISTING OF 27
 EMPLOYEES OF THE TULSA SLSFO, THE MCALISTER SFOU AND THE CHELSEA SFOU
 WHICH IT SHOULD CONTINUE TO REPRESENT.  THE IAM ARGUES THAT THE UNIT IS
 APPROPRIATE AS THESE EMPLOYEES CONTINUE TO SHARE COMMON SUPERVISION,
 EXPERIENCE INTERCHANGE, ENJOY COMMON PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES,
 AND PERFORM THE SAME WORK IN THE SAME LOCATIONS AS BEFORE THE
 REORGANIZATION.
 
    IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE, THE RECORD CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE
 AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF THE TULSA SLSFO, AS A SECOND LEVEL SUPERVISOR,
 IS QUITE LIMITED IN THAT HE IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO INITIATE OR DECIDE
 ADVERSE ACTIONS, RESOLVE FORMAL GRIEVANCES UNDER THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
 PROVIDED IN THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE ACTIVITY
 AND THE IAM, NOR NEGOTIATE A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT.  FURTHER,
 THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES THAT THE 56 FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE TULSA AFS,
 INCLUDING THOSE EMPLOYEES NOW ASSIGNED TO THE TULSA SLSFO, ARE BOUND BY
 THE SAME PERSONNEL PRACTICES AND WORKING CONDITIONS AND ARE UNDER THE
 OVERALL SUPERVISION OF THE RESPECTIVE AFS SECTOR MANAGERS IN THE SAME
 MANNER AS THE OTHER EMPLOYEES.
 
    UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND NOTING PARTICULARLY THAT THE EMPLOYEES
 OF THE DISESTABLISHED TULSA AFS HAD BEEN ASSIGNED TO TWO SEPARATE SECTOR
 OFFICES, WHERE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT WORKING CONDITIONS, PERSONNEL
 POLICIES AND PRACTICES AND SEPARATE OVERALL SUPERVISION, THE AUTHORITY
 FINDS THAT THE SEPTEMBER 10, 1978, REORGANIZATION, WHICH ABOLISHED THE
 TULSA AFS, AFFECTED A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN BOTH THE SCOPE AND CHARACTER
 OF THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT REPRESENTED BY THE IAM, IN EFFECT,
 RENDERING SUCH UNIT INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE
 RECOGNITION UNDER THE ORDER.  CONSEQUENTLY, IN THE AUTHORITY'S VIEW, THE
 ACTIVITY IS UNDER NO OBLIG