[ v13 p529 ]
13:0529(88)UC
The decision of the Authority follows:
13 FLRA No. 88
U.S. ARMY SUPPORT COMMAND, HAWAII
Activity/Petitioner
and
HAWAII FEDERAL LODGE 1998,
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS,
AFL-CIO
Labor Organization/Petitioner
Case No. 8-UC-20001
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed with the Federal Labor Relations Authority
under section 7112(d) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
Statute (the Statute), a hearing was held before a hearing officer of
the Authority. The Authority has reviewed the hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error.
The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the contentions of the
parties, the Authority finds:
The U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii (Activity) and the Hawaii
Federal Lodge 1998, International Association of Machinists and
Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO (IAM), jointly filed the instant petition
seeking to consolidate four units for which the IAM is the exclusive
representative. The units presently represented by IAM and covered by
the petition are set forth in the Appendix. /1/
IAM and the Activity stipulated that the following proposed
consolidated unit is appropriate under the Statute:
Included: All employees assigned to the SUP/SVCS Division,
Munitions Division, Maintenance Division, and Contracting
Division, Directorate of Industrial Operations; All permanent
employees assigned to the Housing Division, Building and Grounds
Division and Utilities Division, Directorate of Engineering and
Housing; All GS employees assigned to the Management Information
Systems Office; All area TMDE employees, Support Branch, HI
(MICOM) and all employees of the Schofield Barracks Commissary
(Western Field Office, USA Trp Spt Agency).
Excluded: All management officials, professional employees,
guards, confidential employees, employees engaged in personnel
work in other than a purely clerical capacity, and all other
employees not specifically included above in the aforementioned
unit.
The Activity and the IAM assert that while they are agreed that the
above-described proposed consolidated unit would be appropriate, they
are unable to adequately describe the unit as a result of a series of
reorganizations which have occurred since these units came into
existence.
At the time of the hearing herein, the Activity, headquartered at
Fort Shafter, Hawaii, provided a variety of support services to all U.S.
Army elements located in Hawaii. Under the direction of a Commander and
Executive Officer, the Activity is organized into a large number of
offices, directorates and divisions. In addition, there are offices and
directorates attached, but not subordinate, to the Activity. The
proposed consolidated unit encompasses the Directorate of Industrial
Operations (DIO) and elements of the Directorate of Engineering and
Housing (DEH), as well as the Management Information Services Office
(MISO). The total number of employees in all four IAM units is
approximately 950-1000. In addition to the four bargaining units
involved in the instant petition, there are two other bargaining units
at the Activity: an Activity-wide unit of all non-appropriated fund
employees, who are assigned to the Directorates of Personnel and
Community Activities, Industrial Operations, and Engineering and
Housing, represented by Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO;
and a unit of employees assigned to the Fort Shafter and Schofield
Barracks motor pools, Division of Transportation, Directorate of
Industrial Operations, represented by the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO. There were approximately 500-600 Activity
civilian employees unrepresented at the time of the hearing herein.
In Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89
(1981), the Authority dismissed petitions to consolidate units noting
that section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute /2/ requires any unit found
appropriate to conform to the three criteria established by that
section-- a clear and identifiable community of interest among the
employees in the unit, and the promotion of effective dealings with, and
the efficiency of the operations of, the agency involved. The Authority
further noted that section 7112(d) of the Statute, /3/ which provides
for the consolidation of existing units into a single more comprehensive
unit, requires that such consolidated unit meet the same three criteria
required of any proposed unit.
With regard to the community of interest criterion, the Authority
will consider the degree of commonality and integration of the mission
and function of the components involved; the distribution of the
employees involved throughout the organizational and geographical
components of the agency; the degree of similarity in the occupational
undertakings of the employees in the proposed unit; and the locus and
scope of personnel and labor relations authority and functions.
Department of the Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, 8 FLRA No. 4 (1982).
In the instant case, the record reveals that approximately 12-13
members of bargaining unit No. 1 set forth in the Appendix, assigned to
"AREA TMDE Support Branch Hawaii (MICOM)," are employed by the TMDE
Support Group U.S. Missile Command, U.S. Army Materiel Development and
Readiness Command. Further, approximately 88 full-time and 67 part-time
members of bargaining unit No. 2, assigned to the Schofield Barracks
Commissary, are employed by the Western Region Commissary Office, U.S.
Army Troop Support Agency. Both the Area TMDE Support Branch Hawaii
(MICOM) and the Schofield Barracks Commissary are tenants of the
Activity, and receive personnel and labor relations services from the
Activity's Civilian Personnel Office under separate servicing agreements
which take due regard of each tenant command's policies governing such
matters. Thus, between 15% and 20% of the employees in the proposed
consolidated unit are individuals who, as a result of past
reorganizations, are no longer employed by the Activity but instead are
employed by other tenant commands and serviced by the Activity's
personnel office. These employees are subject to personnel and labor
relations policies which may be separate and distinct from those
covering the Activity's employees in the proposed consolidated unit.
The Authority finds that the proposed consolidated unit is not
appropriate for the purposes of exclusive recognition under the
provisions of section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute. Thus, as noted above,
employees of the Area TMDE Support Branch Hawaii and the employees of
the Schofield Barracks Commissary do not share, with each other or with
other employees in the proposed consolidated unit, common mission,
supervision, or uniform personnel and labor relations policies. Based
on these facts, the proposed consolidated unit would not ensure a clear
and identifiable community of interest among the employees involved.
See U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 11 FLRA No. 28 (1983).
While the parties have jointly petitioned to consolidate the four units
exclusively represented by the IAM, the Authority concludes that a unit
consolidation proceeding is not the appropriate vehicle for clarifying
previously recognized or certified units to reflect changes occasioned
by reorganizations. Accordingly, without passing upon whether a
proposed consolidated unit limited to employees of the Activity alone
would be appropriate, the Authority will order that the instant petition
be dismissed. /4/
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 8-CU-20001 be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
Issued, Washington, D.C., December 22, 1983
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
APPENDIX
UNIT NO. 1: INCLUDED: All Classification Act and Wage Grade
employees assigned to Supply Division and Maintenance Division,
Directorate of Industrial Operations and Hawaii Calibration Section
(Sacramento Army Depot).
EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees,
guards and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely
clerical capacity.
UNIT NO. 2: INCLUDED: All Classification Act and Wage Grade
employees assigned to Services Division, Housing Division, and
Procurement Division, Directorate of Industrial Operations and Schofield
Barracks Commissary (Western Field Office, USA Troup Support Agency).
EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees,
guards and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely
clerical capacity.
UNIT NO. 3: INCLUDED: All permanent Classification Act and Wage
Grade employees assigned to the Maintenance, Repair, and the Utilities
Function of the Directorate of Facilities Engineering, specifically
including all employees assigned to the Buildings and Grounds and
Utilities Division of Fort Schafter and Schofield Barracks.
EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees,
guards, and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely
clerical capacity.
UNIT NO. 4: INCLUDED: All Classification Act employees assigned the
Management Information Systems Office.
EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees,
guards, and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely
clerical capacity.
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The Appendix sets forth the descriptions for each of the units as
now set forth in the parties' collective bargaining agreement. The
descriptions of units 1, 2 and 3 reflect the many changes resulting from
reorganizations in previous years for which neither the IAM nor the
Activity filed appropriate petitions for clarification under Sec.
2422.1(c) or (d) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. As noted at
p. 4, infra, a unit consolidation proceeding is not an appropriate
vehicle for clarifying previously recognized or certified units to
reflect changes occasioned by reorganizations.
/2/ Section 7112(a)(1) provides:
Sec. 7112. Determination of appropriate units for labor
organization representation
(a)(1) The Authority shall determine the appropriateness of any
unit. The Authority shall determine in each case whether, in
order to ensure employees the fullest freedom in exercising the
rights guaranteed under this chapter, the appropriate unit should
be established on an agency, plant, installation, functional, or
other basis and shall determine any unit to be an appropriate unit
only if the determination will ensure a clear and identifiable
community of interest among the employees in the unit and will
promote effective dealings with, and efficiency of the operations
of, the agency involved.
/3/ Section 7112(d) provides as follows:
(d) Two or more units which are in an agency and for which a
labor organization is the exclusive representative may, upon
petition by the agency or labor organization, be consolidated with
or without an election into a single larger unit if the Authority
considers the larger unit to be appropriate. The Authority shall
certify the labor organization as the exclusive representative of
the new larger unit.
/4/ Inasmuch as all three criteria of section 7112(a)(1) of the
Statute must be satisfied in order for the Authority to find that the
proposed consolidated unit is appropriate, and a failure to satisfy any
one of them must result in a finding that the unit sought is
inappropriate, see Department of the Navy, Navy Publications and
Printing Service Branch Office, Vallejo, California, 10 FLRA No. 108
(1982); Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89
(1981), the Authority's finding that the unit sought herein fails to
meet the community of interest criterion makes it unnecessary to address
the other two criteria.