National Labor Relations Board, Region 5 (Activity) and National Labor Relations Board Union, Local 5 (Union)
[ v02 p328 ]
02:0328(42)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
2 FLRA No. 42 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, REGION 5 (Activity) and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD UNION, LOCAL 5 (Union) Case No. 0-NG-62 DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE UNION PROPOSAL /1/ ARTICLE III IT IS RECOGNIZED BY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR AND THE UNION THAT THE NATURE OF THE WORK OF THE NLRB AT TIMES NECESSITATES THAT PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES WORK OUTSIDE OF REGULAR OFFICE HOURS (EIGHT HOURS PER DAY AND/OR FORTY HOURS PER WEEK). IN RECOGNITION OF THIS FACT IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES WHOSE ASSIGNMENTS NECESSITATE THEIR WORKING OUTSIDE REGULAR OFFICE HOURS WILL BE PERMITTED TO CLAIM PAID OVERTIME OR COMPENSATORY TIME FOR ALL WORK PERFORMED OUTSIDE REGULAR OFFICE HOURS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING: 1. PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES WILL WORK EIGHT HOURS A DAY. * * * * 5. PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES ARE ENTITLED TO ONE 30 MINUTE GRACE PERIOD PER PAY PERIOD. PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES MAY USE ALL OR PART OF THIS GRACE PERIOD TO COVER OCCASIONAL AND UNAVOIDABLE INSTANCES OF TARDINESS IN REPORTING FOR WORK IN THE MORNING. (ONLY SECTION 5 IS DISPUTED IN THE INSTANT CASE.) QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL FOR, IN EFFECT, EXCUSED ABSENCE OF UP TO THIRTY MINUTES PER PAY PERIOD PER EMPLOYEE FOR OCCASIONAL AND UNAVOIDABLE TARDINESS IN REPORTING TO WORK, IS WITHIN THE AGENCY'S DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE(THE STATUTE) OR IS OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN BECAUSE IT WOULD VIOLATE LAW AND GOVERNMENT-WIDE REGULATIONS, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY. OPINION CONCLUSION: THE PROPOSAL CONCERNS MATTERS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH UNDER SECTION 7117(A) OF THE STATUTE. /2/ ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.8 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (44 FED.REG. 44740 ET SEQ.(1979)), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IS SET ASIDE. /3/ REASONS: THE AGENCY CONSTRUES THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IN THIS CASE TO BE AN ATTEMPT TO NEGOTIATE A WORKWEEK OF LESS THAN FORTY HOURS. IT CONTENDS THAT, SINCE FEDERAL STATUTE AND GOVERNMENT-WIDE REGULATION(5 U.S.C. 6101 AND FPM SUPPLEMENT 990-1, PART 610) PROHIBIT A REDUCTION OF THE BASIC WORKWEEK TO LESS THAN FORTY HOURS, THE PROPOSAL, THEREFORE, IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN. THE AGENCY HAS MISINTERPRETED THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL AND ITS CONTENTION IS WITHOUT MERIT VIS-A-VIS THE PLAIN LANGUAGE AND INTENDED MEANING OF THE PROPOSAL. ON ITS FACE, THE PROPOSAL IS CONCERNED ONLY WITH THE CONTINGENCY OF EMPLOYEES OCCASIONALLY ARRIVING LATE TO WORK BECAUSE OF REASONS WHICH ARE BEYOND THEIR CONTROL. CONTRARY TO THE AGENCY'S ASSERTIONS, THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT PURPORT TO AUTHORIZE EMPLOYEES TO WORK LESS THAN EIGHT HOURS A DAY OR FORTY HOURS A WEEK. THEREFORE, THE PROPOSAL WOULD NOT, AS THE AGENCY FURTHER CLAIMS, VEST EMPLOYEES WITH THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE WHEN, AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES, THE BRIEF TARDINESS, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PROPOSAL, WOULD NOT BE CHARGED TO LEAVE. THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY IN THIS CASE ADDS SUPPORT TO THE PLAIN MEANING OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROPOSAL. IT INDICATES THAT THE UNDISPUTED PORTION OF THE UNION'S PROPOSED ARTICLE III, ITSELF, PROVIDES AS A GENERAL REQUIREMENT THAT EMPLOYEES WILL WORK EIGHT HOURS A DAY OR FORTY HOURS A WEEK; AND THAT THE UNION EXPRESSLY INTENDS THAT SUCH REQUIREMENT WOULD BE ENFORCEABLE BY MANAGEMENT. IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR THAT THE DISPUTED LANGUAGE REGARDING A "GRACE PERIOD" OF 30 MINUTES PER PAY PERIOD DOES NOT BY ITS PLAIN LANGUAGE, OR UNDER THE UNION'S STATEMENT AS TO THE INTENDED MEANING OF THAT LANGUAGE, AUTHORIZE EMPLOYEES TO BE LATE FOR WORK EITHER REGULARLY OR FOR AVOIDABLE REASONS, WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE. THE QUESTION REMAINS, WHETHER THE AGENCY HAS DISCRETION UNDER LAW AND REGULATIONS TO EXCUSE SUCH OCCASIONAL, UNAVOIDABLE AND BRIEF ABSENCES DURING DUTY HOURS. SINCE THE SCOPE OF AN AGENCY'S AUTHORITY TO EXCUSE AN EMPLOYEE FROM WORK FOR OCCASIONAL, UNAVOIDABLE AND BRIEF PERIODS OF TIME, WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE OR LOSS OF PAY, IS NOT CLEARLY DEFINED IN LAW, IN THE ABSENCE OF A STATUTORY BAR, SUCH AS HERE, WE FIND THAT THE HEAD OF AN AGENCY IS NOT PRECLUDED FROM EXERCISING DISCRETION ON SUCH MATTERS. /4/ IN THIS REGARD, THE FPM LISTS EXAMPLES OF CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH AGENCIES GENERALLY EXCUSE ABSENCE WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE. THE LIST EXPRESSLY INCLUDES "TARDINESS AND BRIEF ABSENCE" THE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WHICH THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IN THIS CASE IS CONCERNED. /5/ HENCE, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL MERELY PROVIDES FOR EXCUSED ABSENCE WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE FOR OCCASIONAL, BRIEF, AND UNAVOIDABLE TARDINESS IN REPORTING FOR WORK AND THAT APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS DO NOT PRECLUDE THE AGENCY FROM EXERCISING ITS ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION TO EXCUSE SUCH ABSENCE. FOR THE REASONS STATED, AND SINCE IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH ANY APPLICABLE LAW OR REGULATION, THE PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 7117(A) OF THE STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION IS SET ASIDE. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., DECEMBER 31, 1979 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY /1/ IT APPEARS FROM THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THAT THE UNION'S PROPOSAL IS ONE OF MANY RELATED PROPOSALS OFFERED BY THE UNION DURING THE COURSE OF NEGOTIATIONS FOR A LOCAL SUPPLEMENTARY AGREEMENT. THE UNION REQUESTED ASSISTANCE FROM THE FEDERAL SERVICE IMPASSES PANEL AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS NOTIFIED IN WRITING BY THE AGENCY THAT THE PROPOSED THIRTY MINUTE GRACE PERIOD PER PAY PERIOD WAS OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN. /2/ THE STATUTE, SEC. 7117(92 STAT. 1205) PROVIDES, IN RELEVANT PART, AS FOLLOWS: SEC. 7117. DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; COMPELLING NEED; DUTY TO CONSULT (A)(1) SUBJECT TO PARAGRAPH (2) OF THIS SUBSECTION, THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH SHALL, TO THE EXTENT NOT INCONSISTENT WITH ANY FEDERAL LAW OR ANY GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULE OR REGULATION, EXTEND TO MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF ANY AGENCY RULE OR REGULATION REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH (3) OF THIS SUBSECTION ONLY IF THE AUTHORITY HAS DETERMINED UNDER SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION THAT NO COMPELLING NEED(AS DETERMINED UNDER REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE AUTHORITY) EXISTS FOR THE RULE OR REGULATION. /3/ IN SO DECIDING THAT THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO JUDGMENT AS TO THE MERITS OF THE PROPOSAL. /4/ ACCORD, 53 COMP. GEN. 583(1974), 53 COMP. GEN. 1054(1974), 54 COMP. GEN. 706(1975), 55 COMP. GEN. 510(1975), 56 COMP. GEN. 865(1977). /5/ FPM SUPPLEMENT 990-2, BOOK 630, SUBCHAPTER S11-5, PROVIDES, IN RELEVANT PART: ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION A. GENERAL. WITH FEW EXCEPTIONS, AGENCIES DETERMINE ADMINISTRATIVELY SITUATIONS IN WHICH THEY WILL EXCUSE EMPLOYEES FROM DUTY WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE AND MAY BY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION PLACE ANY LIMITATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS THEY FEEL ARE NEEDED. SOME OF THE MORE COMMON SITUATIONS IN WHICH AGENCIES GENERALLY EXCUSE ABSENCES WITHOUT CHARGE TO LEAVE AND IN ADDITION TO THOSE SPECIFICALLY GIVEN ABOVE, ARE COVERED IN THIS SECTION. * * * * C. TARDINESS AND BRIEF ABSENCE. BRIEF ABSENCE FROM DUTY OF LESS THAN AN HOUR AND TARDINESS MAY BE EXCUSED WHEN REASONS APPEAR TO BE ADEQUATE TO THE SUPERVISOR . . . . THE ABSENCE MAY ALSO BE COMPENSATED FOR BY ADDITIONAL WORK OR MAY BE CHARGED AGAINST ANY COMPENSATORY TIME THE EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE TO HIS CREDIT OR MAY BE CHARGED TO ANNUAL LEAVE, LEAVE WITHOUT PAY(WITH THE EMPLOYEE'S CONSENT), OR ABSENCE WITHOUT LEAVE. THE ABSENCE MAY BECOME THE BASIS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION ACCORDING TO THE POLICY OF THE AGENCY.