[ v02 p451 ]
02:0451(62)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
2 FLRA No. 62 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1928 (Union) and DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER WARMINSTER, PENNSYLVANIA (Activity) Case No. 0-NG-13 DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE UNION PROPOSAL (C)IVILIAN AND OFFICER PERSONNEL WHO ARE ENGAGED IN FOOT HAZARDOUS OPERATIONS AND WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION (SHALL) BE PROVIDED WITH SAFETY SHOES WITHOUT CHARGE. QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL FALLS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE), OR WHETHER, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY, THE DUTY TO BARGAIN DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE PROPOSAL IN VIEW OF PUBLISHED AGENCY REGULATIONS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE. /1/ OPINION CONCLUSION: THE AGENCY HAS FAILED TO SUPPORT ITS ALLEGATION THAT THE UNION'S PROPOSAL FALLS OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.8 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS(44 FED. REG. 44740 ET SEQ.(1979)), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION IS SET ASIDE. /2/ REASONS: THE PROPOSAL AT ISSUE ESSENTIALLY WOULD REQUIRE THE ACTIVITY TO PROVIDE, WITHOUT CHARGE, SAFETY SHOES FOR EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION IN THE COURSE OF THEIR WORK. THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (THE AGENCY) ALLEGES THAT NEGOTIATION OF THIS PROPOSAL IS BARRED, UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE, BY AN AGENCY REGULATION (DOD INSTRUCTION 6055.2) /3/ WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE AGENCY, "REQUIRES THAT COMPONENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROVIDE ANY REQUIRED PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE . . . (INCLUDING) SAFETY SHOES FOR EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION." THIS PARTICULAR REGULATION WAS RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME BY THE AGENCY IN ITS STATEMENT OF POSITION TO THE AUTHORITY, IN RESPONSE TO THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW. /4/ THE AGENCY'S SOLE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF ITS ALLEGATION IS AS FOLLOWS: NO DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AUTHORITY THAT NO COMPELLING NEED EXISTS FOR DOD INSTRUCTION 6055.2; NO UNION HAS RAISED A QUESTION AS TO THE COMPELLING NEED FOR THAT REGULATION; AND THEREFORE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, PURSUANT TO 5 U.S.C. 7117(A)(2), DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE MATTER AT ISSUE HERE. IN THIS CONNECTION, THE AGENCY DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE UNION SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXPECTED TO ANTICIPATE A QUESTION REGARDING THE COMPELLING NEED FOR THIS AGENCY REGULATION WHICH, AS INDICATED, HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE AGENCY. FURTHER THE AGENCY DOES NOT ADVERT TO ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THE PROPOSAL AND THE REGULATION. MOREOVER, THE AGENCY DOES NOT MAKE ANY SHOWING WHATSOEVER TO SUPPORT A FINDING BY THE AUTHORITY THAT A COMPELLING NEED DOES EXIST FOR THE REGULATION IN QUESTION TO BAR NEGOTIATIONS ON THE UNION'S PROPOSAL. THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH UNDER SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE EXTENDS IN GENERAL TO MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF AGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS WHICH ARE NOT GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULES AND REGULATIONS, TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL LAW. /5/ WHEN THERE IS A "COMPELLING NEED," HOWEVER, FOR PARTICULAR INTERNAL AGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS TO PREVAIL VIS A VIS PARTICULAR CONFLICTING UNION BARGAINING PROPOSALS, SUCH RULES AND REGULATIONS WILL STAND AS BARS TO NEGOTIATION ON SUCH PROPOSALS. THEREFORE, INTERNAL AGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS, SUCH AS THE DOD INSTRUCTION INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE, MAY BAR NEGOTIATIONS ON CONFLICTING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROPOSALS WHEN, UNDER THE STATUTE, A COMPELLING NEED FOR SUCH A RESULT IS DETERMINED TO EXIST BY THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO SUBPART B OF ITS RULES. /6/ HENCE, IN A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE AUTHORITY SUCH AS THE INSTANT CASE INVOLVING AN ALLEGATION BY AN AGENCY THAT A UNION PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE BECAUSE OF AN INTERNAL AGENCY REGULATION RAISED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE AGENCY'S STATEMENT OF POSITION, THE AGENCY BEARS THE BURDEN OF COMING FORWARD WITH AFFIRMATIVE SUPPORT FOR ITS ASSERTION THAT THE REGULATION IN QUESTION BARS NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE, IMPLICITLY, A COMPELLING NEED EXISTS FOR THE REGULATION. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENT IN THE AUTHORITY'S RULES CONCERNING THE REVIEW OF NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES THAT AN AGENCY'S STATEMENT OF POSITION FILED WITH THE AUTHORITY SHALL SET FORTH "IN FULL ITS POSITION ON ANY MATTERS RELEVANT TO THE PETITION WHICH IT WISHES THE AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER IN REACHING ITS DECISION, INCLUDING A FULL AND DETAILED STATEMENT OF ITS REASONS SUPPORTING THE ALLEGATION." FURTHERMORE, WITH REGARD TO ITS OWN REGULATIONS, THE AGENCY OBVIOUSLY SHOULD HAVE THE GREATEST FAMILIARITY WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE PARTICULAR REGULATION INVOLVED WAS DEVELOPED AND ISSUED AND THE PURPOSE IT WAS INTENDED TO SERVE. CONSEQUENTLY, SINCE THE AGENCY IS RELYING ON THE REGULATION TO BAR NEGOTIATIONS ON AN OTHERWISE NEGOTIABLE PROPOSAL, THE AGENCY PROPERLY IS REQUIRED TO ADDUCE SUCH RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE STATEMENT OF ITS POSITION BEFORE THE AUTHORITY. IN THIS CASE, AS ALREADY INDICATED, THE AGENCY HAS SUBMITTED NO AFFIRMATIVE SUPPORT TO THE AUTHORITY UPON WHICH THE AUTHORITY COULD BASE A FINDING THAT A COMPELLING NEED EXISTS FOR THE REGULATION IN QUESTION TO BAR NEGOTIATIONS ON THE UNION'S PROPOSAL. THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING REASONS, WE FIND THAT THE AGENCY HAS FAILED TO SUPPORT ITS ALLEGATION THAT THE UNION'S PROPOSAL FALLS OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE BECAUSE OF AN INTERNAL AGENCY REGULATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE AGENCY ALLEGATION IS SET ASIDE. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 17, 1980 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY /1/ THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE, SEC. 7117(A)(92 STAT. 1205) PROVIDES 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 OF ANY GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULE OR REGULATION, EXTEND TO MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF ANY RULE OR REGULATION ONLY IF THE RULE OR REGULATION IS NOT A GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULE OR REGULATION. (2) THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH SHALL, TO THE EXTENT NOT INCONSISTENT WITH 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) PARAGRAPH (2) OF THE SUBSECTION APPLIES TO ANY RULE OR REGULATION ISSUED BY ANY AGENCY OR ISSUED BY ANY PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION OF SUCH AGENCY, UNLESS AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTS AN APPROPRIATE UNIT INCLUDING NOT LESS THAN A MAJORITY OF THE EMPLOYEES IN THE ISSUING AGENCY OR PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION, AS THE CASE MAY BE, TO WHOM THE RULE OR REGULATION IS APPLICABLE. /2/ 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. /3/ DOD INSTRUCTION 6055.2, "PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT" (MAY 3, 1978), PROVIDES, IN RELEVANT PART: B. APPLICABILITY AND SCOPE 1. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS INSTRUCTION APPLY TO THE . . . MILITARY DEPARTMENTS . . . (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS "DOD COMPONENTS") * * * * C. POLICY 1. WHEREVER FEASIBLE, OCCUPATIONAL HAZARDS WILL BE ELIMINATED THROUGH ENGINEERING OR MANAGEMENT CONTROLS . . . 2. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT APPROPRIATE TO THE WORK SITUATION WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE DOD COMPONENT CONCERNED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IN THOSE SITUATIONS: A. WHERE ENGINEERING AND/OR MANAGEMENT CONTROLS ARE NOT FEASIBLE. B. WHERE DEVELOPMENT OR INSTALLATION OF ENGINEERING CONTROLS ARE PENDING. C. THAT INVOLVE SHORT TERM, NONROUTINE OPERATIONS FOR WHICH ENGINEERING CONTROLS ARE NOT PRACTICABLE. D. WHICH INVOLVE EMERGENCIES; . . . D. RESPONSIBILITIES HEADS OF DOD COMPONENTS SHALL INCLUDE AND ENFORCE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IN THEIR SAFETY AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS: 1. EVALUATE WORKPLACES, INCLUDING APPLICABLE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DATA, TO DETERMINE PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS. QUALIFIED SAFETY AND HEALTH PERSONNEL SHOULD PERFORM THESE EVALUATIONS. * * * * /4/ THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW RESULTED FROM AN ALLEGATION BY THE ACTIVITY THAT THE PROPOSAL VIOLATED A DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY REGULATION. THE AGENCY NO LONGER RELIES ON THE NAVY REGULATION AS A BAR TO NEGOTIATION IN THIS CASE. /5/ SECTION 7117(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE. NOTE 1, SUPRA. /6/ SECTION 7117(A)(2) AND (3) OF THE STATUTE, NOTE 1, SUPRA, AND SECTION 2424.11 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (44 FED. REG. 44766(1979)) WHICH PROVIDES: SEC. 2424.11 ILLUSTRATIVE CRITERIA. A COMPELLING NEED EXISTS FOR AN AGENCY RULE OR REGULATION CONCERNING ANY CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT WHEN THE RULE OR REGULATION MEETS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING ILLUSTRATIVE CRITERIA: (A) THE RULE OR REGULATION IS ESSENTIAL, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM HELPFUL OR DESIRABLE, TO THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE MISSION OF THE AGENCY OR PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION; (B) THE RULE OR REGULATION IS ESSENTIAL, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM HELPFUL OR DESIRABLE, TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE AGENCY OR THE PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION; (C) THE RULE OR REGULATION IS NECESSARY TO INSURE THE MAINTENANCE OF BASIC MERIT PRINCIPLES; (D) THE RULE OR REGULATION IMPLEMENTS A MANDATE TO THE AGENCY OR PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION UNDER LAW OR OTHER OUTSIDE AUTHORITY, WHICH IMPLEMENTATION IS ESSENTIALLY NONDISCRETIONARY IN NATURE; OR (E) THE RULE OR REGULATION ESTABLISHES UNIFORMITY FOR ALL OR A SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE AGENCY OR PRIMARY NATIONAL SUBDIVISION WHERE THIS IS ESSENTIAL TO THE EFFECTUATION OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST.