[ v01 p528 ]
01:0528(60)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
1 FLRA No. 60
PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Respondent
and
ASSOCIATION OF CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS
Complainant
Assistant Secretary
Case No. 20-06675(CA)
DECISION AND ORDER
ON FEBRUARY 26, 1979, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ROBERT J. FELDMAN
ISSUED HIS RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED
PROCEEDING, FINDING THAT THE RESPONDENT HAD ENGAGED IN CERTAIN UNFAIR
LABOR PRACTICES IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 19(A)(1) OF THE ORDER AND
RECOMMENDING THAT IT CEASE AND DESIST THEREFROM AND TAKE CERTAIN
AFFIRMATIVE ACTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE'S RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER. THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
ALSO FOUND THAT THE RESPONDENT HAD NOT ENGAGED IN CERTAIN OTHER ALLEGED
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES AND RECOMMENDED THAT THOSE PORTIONS OF THE
COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED. NO EXCEPTIONS WERE FILED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW JUDGE'S RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER.
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 TRANSITION RULES AND
REGULATIONS (44 F.R. 7). 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).
THEREFORE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2400.2 OF THE AUTHORITY'S TRANSITION
RULES AND REGULATIONS AND SECTION 7135(B) OF THE STATUTE, THE AUTHORITY
HAS REVIEWED THE RULINGS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE MADE AT THE
HEARING AND FINDS THAT NO PREJUDICIAL ERROR WAS COMMITTED. THE RULINGS
ARE HEREBY AFFIRMED. UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE'S RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER AND THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THE
SUBJECT CASE, AND NOTING PARTICULARLY THAT NO EXCEPTIONS WERE FILED, THE
AUTHORITY HEREBY ADOPTS THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. /1/
ORDER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2400.2 OF THE TRANSITION RULES AND REGULATIONS OF
THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND SECTION 7135 OF THE FEDERAL
SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE, THE AUTHORITY HEREBY ORDERS
THAT THE PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD SHALL:
1. CEASE AND DESIST FROM:
(A) REFERRING, IN THE COURSE OF ANY INTERVIEWS FOR PROMOTION, TO ANY
APPLICANT'S OR OTHER EMPLOYEE'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, OR TO THE PRESENCE OF A UNION STEWARD IN ANY SHOP
FOR WHICH SUCH ASSOCIATION IS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT AND IN
WHICH THE APPLICANT BEING INTERVIEWED IS EMPLOYED.
(B) IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER INTERFERING WITH, RESTRAINING, OR
COERCING EMPLOYEES IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS ASSURED BY EXECUTIVE
ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.
2. TAKE THE FOLLOWING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE
PURPOSES AND PROVISIONS OF THE ORDER:
(A) POST AT ITS FACILITIES AT THE PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD,
107 FIELD ARTILLERY BATTALION, HUNT ARMORY, PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA,
COPIES OF THE ATTACHED NOTICE MARKED "APPENDIX" ON FORMS TO BE FURNISHED
BY THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY. UPON RECEIPT OF SUCH FORMS,
THEY SHALL BE SIGNED BY COMMANDING GENERAL, PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL
GUARD, AND THEY SHALL BE POSTED AND MAINTAINED BY HIM FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE
DAYS THEREAFTER, IN CONSPICUOUS PLACES, INCLUDING ALL PLACES WHERE
NOTICES TO EMPLOYEES ARE CUSTOMARILY POSTED. THE COMMANDING GENERAL,
PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, SHALL TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO INSURE
THAT SUCH NOTICES ARE NOT ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER
MATERIAL.
(B) NOTIFY THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, IN WRITING, WITHIN
30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER AS TO WHAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO
COMPLY HEREWITH.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PORTION OF THE COMPLAINT IN
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CASE NO. 20-06675(CA) FOUND NOT TO BE VIOLATIVE OF
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JUNE 14, 1979
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
APPENDIX NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO A DECISION AND
ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND IN
ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF CHAPTER 71 OF TITLE
5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR
EMPLOYEES THAT:
WE WILL NOT REFER, IN THE COURSE OF ANY INTERVIEWS FOR PROMOTION, TO
ANY APPLICANT'S OR OTHER EMPLOYEE'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, OR TO THE PRESENCE OF A UNION STEWARD IN ANY SHOP
FOR WHICH SUCH ASSOCIATION IS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT AND IN
WHICH THE APPLICANT BEING INTERVIEWED IS EMPLOYED.
WE WILL NOT IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER, INTERFERE WITH, RESTRAIN,
OR COERCE EMPLOYEES IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS ASSURED BY EXECUTIVE
ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.
(AGENCY OR ACTIVITY)
DATED: . . . BY: . . .
(SIGNATURE)
THIS NOTICE MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE
OF POSTING, AND MUST NOT BE ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER
MATERIALS.
IF ANY EMPLOYEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE OR
COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS, THEY MAY COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY
WITH THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY,
WHOSE ADDRESS IS: ROOM 509, VANGUARD BUILDING, P.O. BOX 19257, 1111--
20TH STREET, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036.
LEONARD SPEAR, ESQ.
LEWIS TOWER BUILDING
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19102
FOR THE COMPLAINANT
MAJOR GEORGE M. ORNDOFF
DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AFFAIRS
ANNVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17003
FOR THE RESPONDENT
BEFORE: ROBERT J. FELDMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
DECISION AND ORDER
THIS IS AN UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE PROCEEDING IN WHICH A FORMAL HEARING
OF RECORD WAS HELD PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.
(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS "THE ORDER") AND 29 C.F.R. PART 203. THE
DECISION AND ORDER BELOW ARE ISSUED FOR THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TRANSITION RULES AND REGULATIONS
PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL. 44, NO. 1, JANUARY 2, 1979, PP.
5-8.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
THE COMPLAINT, AS AMENDED, CHARGES RESPONDENT WITH VIOLATIONS OF
SECTION 19(A)(1) AND (2) OF THE ORDER. IT IS ALLEGED THAT IN THE COURSE
OF INTERVIEWING APPLICANTS FOR A FOREMAN'S POSITION, LT. COL. ARMSTRONG,
A STAFF ADMINISTRATOR FOR RESPONDENT, QUESTIONED SOME OF THEM WITH
RESPECT TO THEIR UNION MEMBERSHIP AND ALSO ASKED WHETHER THEY OBJECTED
TO THE WEARING OF THE MILITARY UNIFORM.
IN HIS TRANSMITTAL LETTER ACCOMPANYING THE NOTICE OF HEARING, THE
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR STATED THE ISSUE AS FOLLOWS:
DID THE CONDUCT OF THE ACTIVITY'S REPRESENTATIVES AT THE PROMOTION
INTERVIEWS HELD DECEMBER
17, 1977 AT THE HUNT ARMORY, PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, VIOLATE
SECTIONS 19(A)(1) AND (2) OF
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED?
COMPLAINANT CONTENDS THAT AT LEAST THREE OF THE APPLICANTS WERE ASKED
WHETHER ALL OF THE MEN IN THE SHOP WERE MEMBERS OF THE UNION AND WHETHER
THEY KNEW WHO THE UNION SHOP STEWARD WAS; AND THAT THEY WERE ALSO ASKED
WHETHER THEY OBJECTED TO WEARING THE UNIFORM. RESPONDENT CONTENDS THAT
LT. COL. ARMSTRONG DID NOT ASK ANY OF THE APPLICANTS ABOUT HIS UNION
AFFILIATION, BUT MERELY MADE THE STATEMENT THAT HE (ARMSTRONG) WAS AWARE
OF THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE EMPLOYEES AT THE ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE
SHOP WERE UNION MEMBERS, AND THAT HE HAD ALSO BEEN INFORMED THAT ONE OF
THEM WAS A SHOP STEWARD, SUCH STATEMENT HAVING BEEN MADE BY WAY OF
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS OR GENERAL BACKGROUND PRELIMINARY TO ASKING
HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS.
FINDINGS OF FACT
PURSUANT TO DESIGNATION OF RESPONDENT'S TECHNICIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE,
LT. COL ARMSTRONG CONDUCTED INTERVIEWS ON DECEMBER 17, 1977 AT THE HUNT
ARMORY IN PITTSBURGH OF SEVEN APPLICANTS FOR THE POSITION OF GENERAL
MECHANIC FOREMAN. HE WAS ACCOMPANIED AT EACH INTERVIEW BY LT. COL.
REYNOLDS, THE BATTALION COMMANDER, BUT THE INTERVIEWING WAS DONE
EXCLUSIVELY BY LT. COL. ARMSTRONG. SIX OF THE APPLICANTS WERE CIVILIAN
TECHNICIANS EMPLOYED IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP AND WERE
MEMBERS OF COMPLAINANT UNION, THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT FOR THE
UNIT. THE SEVENTH APPLICANT CAME FROM ANOTHER SHOP AND WAS NOT A UNION
MEMBER.
WHETHER BY WAY OF INTERROGATORY OR DECLARATIVE STATEMENT, LT. COL.
ARMSTRONG INTRODUCED INTO EACH INTERVIEW THE SUBJECT OF THE EMPLOYEES IN
THE SHOP BEING UNION MEMBERS AND ONE OF THEM BEING A SHOP STEWARD.
WHATEVER HIS INTENTIONS IN DOING SO, HE CONVEYED TO EACH APPLICANT AN
IDEA THAT UNION MEMBERSHIP AND THE PRESENCE OF THE SHOP STEWARD WERE
SOMEHOW CONSIDERED AS FACTORS IN THE INTERVIEW, IF NOT IN THE ULTIMATE
SELECTION.
EACH APPLICANT WAS REQUESTED BY LT. COL. ARMSTRONG TO GIVE HIS
REACTION TO TWO HYPOTHETICAL SITUATIONS: ONE DEALING WITH A RIF
(REDUCTION IN FORCE) INVOLVING A CHOICE BETWEEN EMPLOYEES OF DISPARATE
SENIORITY STATUS, AND THE OTHER A DISCIPLINARY PROBLEM INVOLVING
REPEATED FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH BREAK-TIME RULES. EACH APPLICANT WAS
ALSO ASKED WHETHER HE HAD ANY OBJECTION TO WEARING THE UNIFORM ON THE
JOB.
THE ONE APPLICANT WHO WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE UNION WAS SELECTED TO
FILL THE VACANCY OF GENERAL MECHANIC FOREMAN.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
SECTION 1 OF THE ORDER PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART AS FOLLOWS:
POLICY. (A) EACH EMPLOYEE OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT,
FREELY AND WITHOUT FEAR OF PENALTY OR REPRISAL, TO FORM, JOIN, AND
ASSIST A LABOR ORGANIZATION
OR TO REFRAIN FROM ANY SUCH ACTIVITY, AND EACH EMPLOYEE SHALL BE
PROTECTED IN THE EXERCISE OF
THIS RIGHT . . . .
THE HEAD OF EACH AGENCY SHALL TAKE THE ACTION REQUIRED TO ASSURE THAT
EMPLOYEES IN THE
AGENCY ARE APPRISED OF THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THIS SECTION, AND THAT NO
INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT,
COERCION, OR DISCRIMINATION IS PRACTICED WITHIN HIS AGENCY TO
ENCOURAGE OR DISCOURAGE
MEMBERSHIP IN A LABOR ORGANIZATION.
IT IS THUS CLEAR THAT A PRIME OBJECTIVE OF THE ORDER IS TO GUARANTEE
THAT UNION MEMBERSHIP OR PARTICIPATION IN UNION ACTIVITIES WILL IN NO
WAY OPERATE TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF ANY EMPLOYEE, AND THAT IT IS THE
FIRST OBLIGATION OF EACH AGENCY TO REFRAIN FROM TAKING ANY ACTION LIKELY
TO CAUSE AN EMPLOYEE TO BE AFRAID THAT SOME PENALTY OR REPRISAL MIGHT
RESULT FROM SUCH MEMBERSHIP OR PARTICIPATION. WHAT TRANSPIRED AT THE
INTERVIEWS IN QUESTION MUST BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THESE
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES.
IN ANSWER TO THE DIRECT QUESTION OF WHETHER HE HAD ASKED ANY OF THE
APPLICANTS IF THEY WERE MEMBERS OF THE UNION, LT. COL. ARMSTRONG
TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
I DID NOT. I STATED TO EACH ONE OF THEM THAT I WAS AWARE THAT THE
MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE
THERE BELONGED TO THE UNION, AND IN FACT, THERE WAS A UNION STEWARD
IN THE JOB. THE ONLY
REASON I MENTIONED THE UNION AT THE TIME WAS TO BRING OUT ALL ASPECTS
OF HYPOTHETICAL
SITUATIONS THAT I WAS GOING TO SURFACE TO THEM. (TR. P. 29)
WHEN LATER ASKED WHY HE HAD MADE SUCH A STATEMENT, HE RESPONDED:
SIMPLY THIS. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A GOOD-- THERE
WERE GOOD COMMUNICATIONS
IN THE SHOP BETWEEN LABOR AND MANAGEMENT IF A RIF WERE TO COME, AND I
WANTED EVERY
INTERVIEWEE, A PROSPECTIVE SUPERVISOR, TO INSURE THAT ALTHOUGH IT MAY
NOT BE REQUIRED, IT IS
NOT ONLY COMMON COURTESY TO GO TO THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE AND SAY
THIS IS WHAT IS IMPENDING
AND WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ON THIS. (TR. P. 46)
THE INTERVIEWER'S OWN VERSION OF HIS REFERENCE TO THE UNION, HOWEVER,
DOES NOT EXPRESS THE INTENTION HE NOW ASCRIBES TO IT. BY SAYING "I AM
AWARE THAT MOST OF THE MEN BELONG TO THE UNION", OR "I UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE IS A UNION STEWARD ON THE JOB", ONE CERTAINLY DOES NOT CONVEY THE
IDEA THAT HE IS STATING HYPOTHETICAL FACTS. NO APPLICANT COULD BE
REASONABLY EXPECTED TO PERCEIVE THAT LT. COL. ARMSTRONG'S AWARENESS OF
ANY FACTS (REGARDING THE UNION OR OTHERWISE) HAD ANY CONNECTION
WHATSOEVER WITH A SUPPOSITITIOUS PROBLEM INVOLVING RIF OR BREAK-TIME.
THE STATEMENT AS HE HIMSELF PHRASED IT APPEARS TO BE COMPLETELY
EXTRANEOUS TO THE SUBJECT OF THE INTERVIEW. EVEN IF UNINTENTIONAL, IT
WAS LIKELY TO, AND IN FACT DID, CAUSE SOME NOT UNREASONABLE CONCERN OR
FEAR ON THE PART OF SOME APPLICANTS THAT THEIR UNION MEMBERSHIP OR
ACTIVITY MIGHT BE PREJUDICIAL TO THEIR CHANGES OF GETTING THE FOREMAN'S
JOB. CONSEQUENTLY, I CONCLUDE THAT RESPONDENT VIOLATED SECTION 19(A)(1)
OF THE ORDER BY INTERFERING WITH OR RESTRAINING SOME APPLICANTS FOR THE
POSITION OF GENERAL MECHANIC FOREMAN IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS
ASSURED BY SECTION 1(A) OF THE ORDER.
WITH RESPECT TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SECTION 19(A)(2), IT IS
REASONABLE TO INFER THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED ACTION DISCOURAGES
MEMBERSHIP IN A LABOR ORGANIZATION, BUT THE QUESTION IS: DID IT DO SO
BY DISCRIMINATION IN REGARD TO HIRING, TENURE, PROMOTION, OR OTHER
CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT? THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE INTERVIEWS
INVOLVED POTENTIAL PROMOTION FOR ALL APPLICANTS. THE FACT THAT THE ONLY
NON-UNION APPLICANT WAS SELECTED FOR THE JOB, HOWEVER, DOES NOT OF
ITSELF PROVE DISCRIMINATION. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE AS TO THE
COMPARATIVE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE APPLICANTS, IT IS JUST AS REASONABLE
TO INFER FROM THE RECORD HEREIN THAT THE SUCCESSFUL APPLICANT WAS
SELECTED SOLELY BECAUSE HE WAS THE BEST QUALIFIED, AS IT IS TO INFER
THAT THE REMAINING SIX APPLICANTS WERE REJECTED BECAUSE OF UNION
CONNECTIONS. IN MY VIEW, COMPLAINANT HAS FAILED TO SUSTAIN ITS BURDEN
OF PROVING DISCRIMINATION, AND HENCE I CONCLUDE THAT NO VIOLATION OF
SECTION 19(A)(2) HAS BEEN SHOWN. SEE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, MARE
ISLAND NAVAL SHIPYARD, A/SLMR NO. 775(1976).
SINCE THE APPLICANTS WERE BEING INTERVIEWED FOR A SUPERVISORY
POSITION AND MIGHT BE CALLED UPON TO ENFORCE AN UNPOPULAR REGULATION
WITH RESPECT TO WEARING UNIFORMS, THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THEY HAD
ANY OBJECTIONS TO WEARING UNIFORMS ON THE JOB APPEARS TO BE ENTIRELY
APPROPRIATE. EVEN THOUGH COMPLAINANT MAY HAVE TAKEN A POSITION CONTRARY
TO THAT OF RESPONDENT ON SUCH ISSUE, WHICH HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF
EXTENSIVE CONTROVERSY, I CONCLUDE THAT SUCH QUESTION WAS NOT VIOLATIVE
OF ANY PROVISION OF THE ORDER.
ORDER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 6(B) OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED, AND
SECTION 203.26(B) OF THE REGULATIONS, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED ON BEHALF OF
THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY THAT THE PENNSYLVANIA ARMY
NATIONAL GUARD SHALL:
1. CEASE AND DESIST FROM:
(A) REFERRING, IN THE COURSE OF ANY INTERVIEWS FOR PROMOTION, TO ANY
APPLICANT'S OR OTHER EMPLOYEE'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, OR TO THE PRESENCE OF A UNION STEWARD IN ANY SHOP
FOR WHICH SUCH ASSOCIATION IS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT AND IN
WHICH THE APPLICANT BEING INTERVIEWED IS EMPLOYED.
(B) IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER, INTERFERING WITH, RESTRAINING, OR
COERCING EMPLOYEES IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS ASSURED BY EXECUTIVE
ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.
2. TAKE THE FOLLOWING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE
PURPOSES AND POLICIES OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED: POST AT THE
FACILITY OF THE PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD,107 FIELD ARTILLERY
BATTALION, HUNT ARMORY, PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, COPIES OF THE ATTACHED
NOTICE MARKED "APPENDIX" ON FORMS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE FEDERAL LABOR
RELATIONS AUTHORITY. ON RECEIPT OF SUCH FORMS, THEY SHALL BE SIGNED BY
THE COMMANDING GENERAL, AND SHALL BE POSTED AND MAINTAINED BY HIM FOR
SIXTY (60) CONSECUTIVE DAYS THEREAFTER IN CONSPICUOUS PLACES, INCLUDING
ALL BULLETIN BOARDS AND OTHER PLACES WHERE NOTICES TO EMPLOYEES ARE
CUSTOMARILY POSTED. THE COMMANDING GENERAL SHALL TAKE REASONABLE STEPS
TO INSURE THAT SUCH NOTICES ARE NOT ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY
OTHER MATERIAL.
(C) PURSUANT TO SECTION 203.27 OF THE REGULATIONS, NOTIFY THE FEDERAL
LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, IN WRITING, WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF
THIS ORDER AS TO WHAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY HEREWITH.
ROBERT J. FELDMAN
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
DATED: FEBRUARY 26, 1979
WASHINGTON, D.C.
APPENDIX NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO A DECISION AND
ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND IN
ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF EXECUTIVE ORDER
11491, AS AMENDED LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS IN THE
FEDERAL SERVICE WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
WE WILL NOT IN THE COURSE OF ANY INTERVIEW FOR PROMOTION, REFER TO
ANY APPLICANT'S OR OTHER EMPLOYEE'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, OR TO THE PRESENCE OF A UNION STEWARD IN ANY SHOP
FOR WHICH SUCH ASSOCIATION IS THE EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING AGENT AND IN
WHICH THE APPLICANT BEING INTERVIEWED IS EMPLOYED.
WE WILL NOT IN ANY LIKE OR RELATED MANNER, INTERFERE WITH, RESTRAIN,
OR COERCE EMPLOYEES IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR RIGHTS ASSURED BY EXECUTIVE
ORDER 11491, AS AMENDED.
PENNSYLVANIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
(AGENCY OR ACTIVITY)
DATED: . . . BY: . . .
COMMANDING GENERAL (SIGNATURE)
THIS NOTICE MUST REMAIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE
OF POSTING, AND MUST NOT BE ALTERED, DEFACED, OR COVERED BY ANY OTHER
MATERIALS.
IF ANY EMPLOYEES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE OF
COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS, THEY MAY COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY
WITH THE REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, WHOSE
ADDRESS IS: ROOM 509, VANGUARD BUILDING, P.O. BOX 19257, 1111-- 20TH
STREET, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036
/1/ 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 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.