---

 13 FLRA No. 73
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
 EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL OF CONSOLIDATED
 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION LOCALS
 Union
 
 and
 
 SOCIAL SECURITY
 ADMINISTRATION
 Agency
 
                                            Case Nos. O-NG-511 
                                                      O-NG-512 
                                                      O-NG-513 
                                                      O-NG-514
 
                DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
 
    The petitions for review in these cases before the Authority pursuant
 to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management
 Relations Statute (the Statute), and raise questions relating to the
 negotiability of four Union proposals.  /1/ Upon careful consideration
 of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority
 makes the following determinations.
 
                             Union Proposal 1
 
          All Claims Representatives, Service Representatives, and DRT's
       will be issued calculators, with memory and percentage functions
       in order to provide computational assistance to said personnel.
       Procedures for the issuance of these devices will be negotiated
       locally.
 
    In agreement with the Agency, the Authority finds that Union Proposal
 1, by expressly requiring the Agency to provide each employee specified
 equipment, clearly concerns the "technology of performing work" within
 the meaning of section 7106(b)(1) of the Statute.  See American
 Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1858 and Department
 of the Army, U.S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, 10
 FLRA No. 74 (1982) (Union Proposal 3) and cases cited therein;  American
 Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local
 2477;  American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
 AFL-CIO, Local 2910;  Congressional Research Employees Association;  and
 Law Library of Congress, United Association of Employees and Library of
 Congress, Washington, D.C., 7 FLRA No. 89 (1982) (Union Proposal IX).
 Under section 7106(b)(1), such matters are negotiable only at the
 election of the Agency.  Thus, in the light of the Agency's election not
 to bargain, Union Proposal 1 is nonnegotiable.
 
                             Union Proposal 2
 
          Mandatory overtime will be limited to emergency situations
       only.
 
    The second proposal, by its express terms, would prevent the Agency
 from determining that work will be performed during overtime except in
 emergency situations.  However, the right "to assign work" under section
 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute includes the right to determine when work
 which has been assigned will be performed.  National Treasury Employees
 Union and Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt, 3 FLRA
 769, 775 (1980), enforced as to other matters sub nom. National Treasury
 Employees Union v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 659 F.2d 553 (D.C.
 Cir. 1982).  Thus, Union Proposal 2, by limiting the Agency's right to
 determine in nonemergency situations that certain work will be performed
 on overtime, violates the Agency's right "to assign work" within the
 meaning of section 7106(a)(2)(B) and is outside the duty to bargain.
 See International Association of Firefighters, Local F-62 and
 Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, 3 FLRA 438 (1980) at 441.
 
                             Union Proposal 3
 
          The employer agrees to take action to ensure that the discarded
       paper products of a facility will be recycled to the maximum
       extent possible.  Procedures for effectuating the intent of this
       provision will be established through local negotiations.
 
                             Union Proposal 4
 
          The employer agrees to provide recyclable paper to local unions
       upon request.  Procedures for effectuating this provision will be
       established through local negotiations.
 
    Union Proposals 3 and 4 on their face do not concern personnel
 policies, practices or matters affecting working conditions of
 bargaining unit employees and the Union in this case did not provide any
 argument whatsoever to establish that such a relationship exists.  In
 this regard, in the absence of any demonstration in the record of a
 direct relationship between the Union's proposals and unit employees'
 work situations or employment relationship, the Authority must find that
 proposals 3 and 4 do not concern matters which are "conditions of
 employment" within the meaning of section 7103(a)(14) of the Statute.
 See International Association of Firefighters, AFL-CIO, CLC, Local F-116
 and Department of the Air Force, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California,
 7 FLRA No. 18 (1981).  Thus, Union Proposals 3 and 4 are outside the
 Agency's obligation to bargain.  /2/
 
    Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review in these
 cases be, and they hereby are dismissed.  
 
 Issued, Washington, D.C., November 17, 1983
 
                                       Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ The Union filed a separate petition for review for each of the
 four proposals.  However, in the interest of expeditious processing of
 these four appeals which arose out of the same set of collective
 bargaining negotiations, the Authority has consolidated the four appeals
 in this decision.
 
 
    /2/ In view of this decision, the Authority finds it unnecessary to
 reach the Agency's additional contention that proposals 3 and 4 violate
 applicable law. 
 
 
 

---