---

 17 FLRA No. 55
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 AFL-CIO, LOCAL 3424
 Union
 
 and
 
 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD,
 WASHINGTON, D.C.
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-769
 
                 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
    The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority
 pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service
 Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), and raises an issue
 relating to the negotiability of the following Union proposal:
 
          Examiners who travel 150 miles or more on official business
       will be permitted three hours overhead travel (OHT).
 
          The above proposal is meant to apply to employees of the
       Federal Home Loan Bank Board for voluntary travel to return home
       for week-ends.
 
    Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the
 parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations.
 
    According to the Union's stated intent, the proposal would require
 the Agency to grant employees a maximum of 3 hours of duty time during
 workdays for the purpose of traveling to and returning from their places
 of residence on week-ends.  Thus the express language of the proposal
 would preclude management from exercising its right to assign work to
 employees during that portion of the workday which is required for
 travel.
 
    In this regard, the Union Proposal herein has the same effect as
 Proposal 1 in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO,
 Local 3424 and Federal Home Loan Bank Board, San Francisco, California,
 14 FLRA No. 18 (1984).  In that case, the proposal at issue required the
 Agency to grant a maximum of three hours of duty time for traveling,
 each way, when employees on temporary duty assignments returned to their
 residences on the weekends.  The Authority held, based on its decisions
 in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3483 and
 Federal Home Loan Bank Board, New York District Office, 13 FLRA No. 80
 (1983), and National Treasury Employees Union and NTEU, Chapter 80 and
 Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Central Region, 8
 FLRA 197 (1982), that because the proposal in Federal Home Loan Bank
 Board, San Francisco would have precluded the assignment of work to
 employees during the duty time on which they were traveling to their
 residences, or returning to their temporary duty assignments, it
 directly interfered with management's right to assign work under section
 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute.  /1/ Thus, as the Union Proposal at issue
 herein similarly would preclude the Agency from assigning work to
 employees during that portion of the workday which they would use for
 travel to and from their residences, for the reasons set forth in the
 FHLBB, San Francisco, FHLBB, New York District and IRS, Central Region
 decisions, it directly interferes with management's right to assign work
 under section 7106(a)(2)(B) and is outside the Agency's duty to bargain.
  /2/
 
    Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review be, and it
 hereby is dismissed.  /3/ Issued, Washington, D.C., March 28, 1985
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis Jr., Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ Section 7106(a)(2)(B) provides, in relevant part:
 
          Sec. 7106.  Management rights
 
          (a) Subject to subsection (b) of this section, nothing in this
       chapter shall affect the authority of any management official of
       any agency--
 
                                .  .  .  .
 
          (2) in accordance with applicable laws--
 
                                .  .  .  .
 
          (B) to assign work(.)
 
 
    /2/ Of course, management must exercise its rights under section
 7106(a)(2) in accordance with applicable laws.  In this case,
 specifically, 5 U.S.C. 6101(b)(2) requires an agency to arrange travel
 during the scheduled workweek "to the maximum extent practicable."
 However, this proposal would require travel during the scheduled
 workweek even where not practicable and is thus inconsistent with
 management's right to assign work.
 
 
    /3/ In view of the decision herein, it is unnecessary to address the
 Agency's additional contentions. 
 
 
 

---