American Federation of Government Employees, Local 225 (Union) and Army Armament Research and Development Command, Dover, New Jersey (Agency)
[ v04 p148 ]
04:0148(24)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
4 FLRA No. 24 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 225 Union and U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND, DOVER, N.J. Agency Case No. O-NG-88 DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE THIS CASE COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (THE AUTHORITY) PURSUANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE), 5 U.S.C. 7101. UNION PROPOSAL ALL PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION SHALL BE ON DUTY TIME. QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH SECTION 7131(B) AND (D) OF THE STATUTE AND, THEREFORE, IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY. OPINION CONCLUSION: THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH SECTION 7131 OF THE STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2424.10), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IS SET ASIDE. /1/ REASONS: AS EXPLAINED BY THE PARTIES, THE PROPOSAL HERE IN DISPUTE, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE THAT THE UNION REPRESENTATIVES' PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION MATTERS WILL BE CONDUCTED ON OFFICIAL TIME, BEARS NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE FROM THE PROPOSALS WHICH WERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR DECISION IN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1692 AND HEADQUARTERS, 323RD FLYING WING (ATC), MATHER AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. O-NG-183, 3 FLRA NO. 47(MAY 30, 1980), AND FEDERAL UNIFORMED FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL F-169 AND U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT COMMAND, DOVER, NEW JERSEY, CASE NO. 0-NG-73, 3 FLRA NO. 49 (MAY 30, 1980) AND HELD TO BE WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE. IN THOSE CASES, THE AUTHORITY HELD THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSALS FOR THE USE OF OFFICIAL TIME BY UNION REPRESENTATIVES TO PREPARE FOR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND IMPASSE RESOLUTION CONCERNED A MATTER WHICH FALLS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7131(D) OF THE STATUTE, RATHER THAN A MATTER WHICH IS EXCEPTED FROM THE DUTY TO BARGAIN AS "INTERNAL BUSINESS OF A LABOR ORGANIZATION" UNDER SECTION 7131(B). IN REACHING ITS DECISION, THE AUTHORITY DID NOT RULE ON THE QUESTION OF WHAT ACTIVITIES WOULD PROPERLY CONSTITUTE "PREPARATIONS" UNDER THE OFFICIAL TIME PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE. THEREFORE, BASED ON THE REASONS SET FORTH IN GREATER DETAIL IN THE MATHER AIR FORCE BASE CASE, THE PROPOSAL HERE IN DISPUTE MUST ALSO BE HELD TO BE WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPTEMBER 4, 1980 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE COPIES OF THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY IN THE SUBJECT PROCEEDING HAVE THIS DAY BEEN MAILED TO THE PARTIES LISTED: MR. RONALD D. KING DIRECTOR CONTRACT & APPEALS DIVISION AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 1325 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, NW. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 MR. W. J. SCHRADER CHIEF OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ROOM 2C655, THE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C. 20310 DR. CAROLYN A. L. WESTERDAHL PRESIDENT LOCAL 1437 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES BUILDING 30, ARRADCOM DOVER, NEW JERSEY 07801 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ IN SO DECIDING THAT THE PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO JUDGMENT AS TO THE MATTERS OF THE PROPOSAL.