---

 7 FLRA No. 99
 
 LOCAL NO. 3, INTERNATIONAL
 FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL
 AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS,
 AFL-CIO-CLC
 Labor Organization/Petitioner
 
 and
 
 NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER,
 ATLANTIC DETACHMENT
 Activity
 
                                            Case No. 2-RO-41
 
         DECISION AND ORDER ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION OF UNIT
 
    UPON A PETITION DULY FILED WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 UNDER SECTION 7111(B)(1) 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, THE AUTHORITY FINDS:  LOCAL NO.
 3, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS,
 AFL-CIO-CLC (UNION), FILED A PETITION SEEKING AN ELECTION IN A UNIT
 COMPOSED OF ALL EMPLOYEES AT THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC
 DETACHMENT, TRAINING SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT (TSD), WHICH IS LOCATED IN
 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.  THE TSD IS ONE OF SEVERAL LINE DEPARTMENTS
 OF THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC DETACHMENT (ACTIVITY).  THE
 ACTIVITY CONTENDS THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS INAPPROPRIATE UNDER THE
 STATUTE ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE TSD DO NOT SHARE A
 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE
 OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY, AND THAT SUCH A UNIT WOULD LEAD
 TO UNWARRANTED FRAGMENTATION OF THE ACTIVITY AND WOULD NOT PROMOTE
 EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF OPERATIONS.  THE ACTIVITY ARGUES
 THAT THE ONLY APPROPRIATE UNIT WOULD BE ACTIVITY-WIDE.  /1/ THE UNION'S
 POSITION THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS APPROPRIATE IS BASED ON ITS GEOGRAPHIC
 LOCATION, UNIQUENESS OF FUNCTION AND THE POSITION DESCRIPTIONS OF THE
 TSD'S EMPLOYEES.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT WHICH THE PETITIONER SEEKS TO
 REPRESENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION
 7112(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE.  /2/ THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THE
 EMPLOYEES SOUGHT TO BE INCLUDED DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE
 COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE
 OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS.  THUS, EMPLOYEES WHO WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE
 PROPOSED UNIT SHARE WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY MANY OF THE
 SAME JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME PERSONNEL POLICIES
 AND PRACTICES.  FURTHER, THERE IS EXTENSIVE INTERCHANGE.  THE RECORD
 SHOWS THAT 30 RO 40 PERCENT OF THE WORKING TIME OF THE EMPLOYEES SOUGHT
 IS SPENT ON TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENTS AWAY FROM TSD AT THE OTHER LINE
 DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY.  LABOR RELATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY IS
 CENTRALIZED IN THE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT AT THE NAVAL WEAPONS
 STATION IN YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA;  LINE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE LIMITED
 AUTHORITY IN PERSONNEL AND DISCIPLINARY MATTERS;  AND ACTIVITY
 INSTRUCTIONS AND MAJOR PERSONNEL MATTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE OFFICER
 IN CHARGE WHO IS ALSO THE ACTIVITY'S EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
 OFFICER.  HENCE, THE PETITIONER HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT THE EMPLOYEES
 IN THE UNIT SOUGHT SHARE TERMS OR CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT SEPARATE AND
 DISTINCT FROM OTHER ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES.  THUS ANY COMMUNITY OF INTEREST
 SEPARATE FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FURTHER NOTES THAT THE PROPOSED UNIT OF 42 OUT OF 421
 ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES WOULD NOT PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS OR EFFICIENCY OF
 AGENCY OPERATIONS SINCE IT WOULD RESULT IN " . . . ARTIFICIAL
 FRAGMENTATION OF AN INTEGRATED ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT OR SUBDIVISION
 OF THE AGENCY ON THE BASIS OF GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION ALONG." U.S.
 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE, MINNEAPOLIS ADP
 FIELD CENTER, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, 5 FLRA NO. 92(1981).  FURTHER, AS
 PREVIOUSLY STATED, PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES ARE CENTRALLY
 ESTABLISHED AND UNIFORMLY IMPLEMENTED FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY.
 
    THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE
 UNIT PETITIONED FOR IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER
 SECTION 7112(A)(1), AND THE PETITION IS HEREBY DISMISSED.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE PETITION IN CASE NO. 2-RO-41 BE, AND IT
 HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 15, 1982
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
 
 
    /1/ THE UNION STATED AT THE HEARING THAT IT WAS NOT PREPARED TO SAY
 IF IT WOULD REPRESENT AN ACTIVITY-WIDE UNIT IF SUCH WAS FOUND TO BE
 APPROPRIATE.
 
    /2/ SECTION 7112(A)(1) PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART:
 
    . . . THE AUTHORITY 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. 
 
 
 

---