15:0338(72)RA - DOI, National Park Service, Western Regional Office, San Francisco, CA and NFFE Local 1 -- 1984 FLRAdec RP
[ v15 p338 ]
15:0338(72)RA
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 72
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
Activity/Petitioner
and
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1, INDEPENDENT
Labor Organization
Case Nos. 9-RA-8
9-RA-9
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon petitions duly filed 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 pursuant to the
Authority's Decision on Request for Review remanding the matter to the
Acting Regional Director. /1/ The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this consolidated case, including the
parties' contentions, the Authority finds:
The Activity/Petitioner filed the instant petitions asserting a good
faith doubt that the incumbent labor organization, National Federation
of Federal Employees, Local 1 (the Union), continues to represent a
majority of the employees in the existing exclusive bargaining units in
view of two reorganizations which have occurred since the units were
certified in 1971. It also contends that the reorganization
substantially affected the scope and character of such units so that the
units no longer remain appropriate. /2/
The Union was certified in 1971 as the exclusive representative for
two units of employees of the National Park Service (NPS) in San
Francisco, California, one including all professionals, and the second
including all non-professionals.
A reorganization took place on June 30, 1972, which eliminated more
than one-half of the total employee complement, reducing the
professional unit by 80 percent. Another reorganization, on February 9,
1981, merged the employees of the Heritage Conservation and Recreation
Service (HCRS), formerly located in Denver, Colorado, with the Western
Regional Office, located in San Francisco, California, thereby
increasing the size of both units. These reorganizations, the Activity
asserts, substantially changed the nature, character, and scope of the
original bargaining units. In addition, the Activity asserts that it
has a good faith doubt with respect to the continued majority status of
the Union. In support of its assertion, the Activity notes, inter alia,
that: (1) the Union has never negotiated a collective bargaining
agreement for either unit; (2) despite the fact that the parties
entered into a dues withholding agreement, only 5 of a total of over 200
employees from both units are presently on dues withholding; (3)
negotiations have never taken place concerning changes in conditions of
employment; (4) there are no stewards representing the employees of
either unit; (5) only one grievance has been filed over the years; and
(6) none of the Union's officers is employed by the NPS.
The Acting Regional Director dismissed the petitions, finding that
they were not supported by adequate objective evidence to establish a
reasonable basis for doubting the Union's majority status or that the
recent reorganization substantially affected the scope and character of
the units to the extent they no longer are appropriate. Thereafter, the
Authority granted the Activity's request for review, finding, contrary
to the Acting Regional Director, that the Activity's assertions
reasonably support a good faith doubt, based on objective
considerations, of the Union's continued majority status as well as the
current appropriateness of the units, and remanded the matter to the
Acting Regional Director. Subsequently, a hearing was conducted in
order to establish a full and complete record with respect to all
issues.
As to the continued appropriateness of the exclusively recognized
units, the evidence leads the Authority to the conclusion that although
the two reorganizations which occurred altered the number of employees
in the bargaining units, nevertheless the mission, scope and character
of the Western Regional Office did not substantially change.
Thus, the primary mission of the Regional Office has been, and
continues to be, to provide administrative support for the operation of
National Parks in California, Hawaii, Nevada, and part of Arizona. This
includes planning for the acquisition and development of Federal lands
and water areas for recreational purposes. The mission also includes
providing archaeological services to Federal agencies involved in
construction efforts.
According to the Activity's personnel management specialist, the
mission of the abolished HCRS was "to provide planning and financial
assistance to state and local governments, and also to provide
enterprise, in the area of outdoor recreation, and also to provide
heritage conservation services to develop and provide historic
conservation services to outside groups." The record reveals that
although the missions of both the Regional Office and the former HCRS
are now pursued by the Regional Office, no dilution of the primary
mission of the Regional Office has taken place by the addition of the
HCRS functions and its former employees to the Regional Office's
operation.
In sum, the record supports a finding that the reorganization which
moved HCRS into the Park Service was done to reduce the scope of
functions that the HCRS had been performing and did not change the
mission of the Regional Office. In this connection, according to
statements attributed to the Secretary of the Interior at the time of
the reorganization, "the emphasis was now more on going towards
supporting the existing national parks than being involved in the
alternative mission."
The units represented by the Union at the Regional Office were
substantially larger than the HCRS which was abolished and transferred
into it. The transfer added only two new job classifications to the
Regional Office bargaining unit, covering only one employee each. All
other job classifications encumbered by former HCRS employees already
existed in the Regional Office. Prior to the reorganization, HCRS
employees were in job classifications similar to those in the Regional
Office, such as historian, architect, outdoor recreation planner, and
clerk-typist. Of some 32 sub-units of the various divisions within the
Regional Office, only one is composed entirely of former HCRS employees,
and only three contain more former HCRS employees than Regional Office
employees. Essentially, the employees were merged into the Regional
Office and, in fact, many of the former HCRS employees occupy positions
that were vacant Regional Office positions. Currently there are
approximately 29 employees in the professional employee bargaining unit
of the Regional Office, of which 9, or 31 percent, were former HCRS
employees. There are now about 129 nonprofessional employees, of which
27, or 21 percent, were formerly with HCRS. Originally there were 92
professional and 12 non-professional employees at HCRS. All employees
of the Regional Office are governed by the same personnel policies,
including promotion, reduction-in-force and pay policies; are
physically located in the same building and share common facilities;
and all are under the supervision of the Regional Director. In these
circumstances, the Authority is persuaded that the addition of employees
to the Regional Office because of the reorganization merely eliminated
the separate function of the office from which the employees were
transferred, and strengthened and reinforced the continuing mission of
the Regional Office. Accordingly, the Authority finds that former HCRS
employees accreted to units exclusively represented by the Union, and
that employees in the units continue to share a community of interest.
Moreover, the units continue to promote effective dealings and
efficiency of agency operations. Thus, such units remain appropriate
for the purpose of exclusive recognition under the Statute and their
scope and character have not been substantially changed by the foregoing
circumstances. See Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 11 FLRA No.
104 (1983).
With respect to the Activity's assertion of a good faith doubt that
the Union continues to represent a majority of employees in the existing
exclusively recognized bargaining units, the Authority finds that the
Union has not requested negotiations with respect to conditions of
employment at any time since it became the exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees in 1971. Also, during the time that the
Union has been the exclusive representative, no grievances have been
filed or processed with the exception of one grievance filed shortly
before the hearing in this case. Finally, only 5 of 200 employees were
on dues withholding at the time of the hearing and no stewards ever have
been designated to represent the employees in either unit.
The Authority concludes that the foregoing circumstances are
sufficient to support a good faith doubt by the Activity/Petitioner as
to the purposes and policies of the Statute to afford the employees in
such units the opportunity to express their desires with respect to
continued exclusive representation by that labor organization.
Based on the foregoing, the Authority finds that the following units
are appropriate for the purpose of exclusive recognition within the
meaning of the Statute:
All professional employees of the Western Regional Office,
excluding non-professional employees, management officials,
supervisors, employees engaged in Federal personnel work other
than in a purely clerical capacity, and guards.
All non-professional classified employees of the Western
Regional Office, excluding professional employees, management
officials, supervisors, employees engaged in Federal personnel
work other than in a purely clerical capacity, and guards.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
An election by secret ballot shall be conducted among the employees
in the units described above as soon as feasible. The appropriate
Regional Director shall supervise or conduct the election, as
appropriate, subject to the Authority's Rules and Regulations. Eligible
to vote are those in the voting groups who were employed during the
payroll period immediately preceding the date below, including employees
who did not work during that period because they were out ill, or on
vacation, or on furlough, including those in the military service who
appear in person at the polls. Ineligible to vote are employees who
have quit or were discharged for cause since the designated payroll
period and who have not been rehired or reinstated before the election
date. Those eligible shall vote on whether or not they desire to be
represented for the purpose of exclusive recognition by the National
Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1, Independent.
Issued, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ Western Regional Office, National Park Service, San Francisco,
California, 10 FLRA 502 (1982).
/2/ Section 2422.1(c) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations states
that an activity or an agency may file a petition seeking to clarify a
representation matter "where (it) has a good faith doubt, based on
objective considerations, that the currently recognized or certified
labor organization represents a majority of the employees in the
existing unit or that, because of a substantial change in the character
and scope of the unit, it has a good faith doubt that such unit is now
appropriate." See also section 2422.2(b) of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations to the same effect.