22:0559(59)CA - DOD, AAF, Army and Air Force Exchange Service, Altus Air Force Base Exchange, Altus, OK And AFGE Local 2586 -- 1986 FLRAdec CA
[ v22 p559 ]
22:0559(59)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
22 FLRA No. 59 DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AND THE AIR FORCE ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE ALTUS AIR FORCE BASE EXCHANGE ALTUS, OKLAHOMA Respondent and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2586 Charging Party Case No. 6-CA-40232 DECISION AND ORDER I. Statement of the Case This unfair labor practice case is before the Authority, in accordance with section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, based on a stipulation of facts by the parties, who have agreed that no material issue of fact exists. Briefs for the Authority's consideration were filed by the Respondent and by the General Counsel. The complaint alleges that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by informing a bargaining unit employee that she had the option of appealing a letter of reprimand through either the agency grievance procedure or the negotiated grievance procedure. Such conduct is alleged to constitute a failure and refusal to comply with section 7121(a)(1) of the Statute. II. Facts On March 7, 1984, the Respondent's agent, Altus Air Force Base Exchange Manager Javier Villalobos, issued a written reprimand to Mary Bailey, a bargaining unit employee, for misuse of sick leave. The letter stated specifically that Bailey had the "right to file within 21 calendar days following receipt of the written reprimand, a grievance through the undersigned . . . pursuant to the provisions of . . . (Army and Air Force Exchange Service Regulations) . . . or the negotiated procedure contained in the current labor agreement, but not both." After consulting with the Union president, Bailey pursued her appeal of the reprimand through the negotiated procedure. III. Positions of the Parties The General Counsel takes the position that the Respondent, by offering the bargaining unit employee a choice of appeal routes, violated the exclusivity of the parties' negotiated grievance procedure as provided under section 7121(a)(1) of the Statute. /1/ The General Counsel contends further that the only exceptions to this provision are those appeal procedures set out specifically under section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute, and that the written reprimand issued to Bailey is clearly not subject to an appeal procedure under either exception. In this latter regard, the General Counsel cites to the Authority's decision in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2955 and National Guard Bureau, Office of the Adjutant General, Des Moines, Iowa, 5 FLRA 617, 620 (1981), in which the Authority concluded with respect to a proposal that would grant bargaining unit employees the option to choose either the negotiated grievance procedure or a statutory procedure concerning "any matter" covered by the grievance procedure: This is clearly inconsistent with section 7121(a)(1) of the Statute which permits such option only in very limited circumstances: that is, where the grievance falls within the coverage of either section 7121(d) or (e) of the Statute. In all other situations, notwithstanding the possible existence of an otherwise applicable statutory procedure, the negotiated procedure must be the exclusive procedure for resolving grievances which fall within its coverage. (Emphasis in original). Thus, the General Counsel argues that the Respondent has granted a bargaining unit employee an option which is inconsistent with the Statute. On the other hand, the Respondent takes the position that its bargaining unit employees have a right under the collective bargaining agreement and by operation of law to use either the negotiated procedure or the agency procedure. The respondent argues that the parties' agreement provides no prohibition against an employee's pursuit of a grievance through the appeals channels provided under Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) Regulations. The Respondent further argues that the nonappropriated fund employees in the bargaining unit should be treated differently inasmuch as they have no statutory appeal procedures like those provided to most Federal employees as referenced in section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute, /2/ and that the adverse action appeal rights granted to the nonappropriated fund employees under AAFES Regulations should be equated to adverse action appeal rights under section 7121(d) and (e). Therefore, the Respondent argues that its bargaining unit employees should have the same right as appropriated fund employees to choose the negotiated grievance procedure or an agency appeal procedure. Finally, the Respondent contends that inasmuch as the bargaining unit employee choose the negotiated procedure, at worst it has commited a technical violation of the Statute that was de minimis in nature. IV. Analysis The plain language of section 7121(a)(1) of the Statute provides that "the . . . (negotiated) . . . procedures shall be the exclusive procedures for resolving grievances which fall within its coverage." (Emphasis added). The only exceptions to this provision involve those matters which are covered by a negotiated grievance procedure but also may be resolved pursuant to the statutory appeal procedures referred to in section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute. The appeal procedure which the Respondent offered as an option to the bargaining unit employee in this case clearly does not fall within either of these two exceptions. Respondent correctly points out that its bargaining unit employees are not covered by the statutory appeal procedures noted in section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute which do not apply to nonappropriated fund employees. While section 7121(e)(1) of the Statute provides that "(s)imilar matters which arise under other personnel systems applicable to employees covered by this chapter may, in the discretion of the aggrieved employee, be raised either under the appellate procedures, if any, applicable to those matters, or under the negotiated grievance procedure, but not both. . . . ," the matter giving rise to the grievance in this case is a reprimand, which is not a similar matter to those matters specifically covered under section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute. As previously noted by the General Counsel, the Authority, in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2955 and National Guard Bureau, Office of the Adjutant General, Des Moines, Iowa, 5 FLRA 617 (1981), concluded, with respect to a proposal which would have provided optional appeal rights beyond the section 7121(d) and (e) exceptions to the exclusivity of the negotiated grievance procedure, that such a proposal is inconsistent with the Statute. /3/ Similarly here, the Authority concludes that for the Respondent to offer a bargaining unit employee such an option is inconsistent with the plain language of section 7121(a)(1) of the Statute and therefore constitutes a failure to comply with section 7121(a)(1) in violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (8). While we agree with the Respondent that the bargaining unit employee involved in this case choose the negotiated grievance procedure, and therefore neither she nor her exclusive representative was deprived of protected rights under the Statute in the instance, the fact remains that the Respondent failed to comply with a specific statutory requirement by offering the employee a choice of procedures. Moreover, there is no basis in the stipulated record before us to support a conclusion that the Respondent will refrain from offering this option to unit employees in the future. Accordingly, the Authority rejects the Respondent's argument that its conduct constituted no more than a technical violation and orders that the Respondent's violative conduct be remedied as set forth below. V. Conclusion The Authority has considered all of the facts and circumstances of this case, including the positions of the parties, and concludes that the Respondent failed to comply with section 7121 of the Statute in violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Statute when it informed a bargaining unit employee that she had the option of appealing a letter of reprimand through either the agency grievance procedure or the negotiated grievance procedure. ORDER Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Statute, it is hereby ordered that the Department of Defense, Department of the Army and the Air Force, Army and Air Force Exchange Service, Altus Air Force Base Exchange, Altus, Oklahoma, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Advising bargaining unit employees that they may choose an appeal procedure, as an alternative to the grievance procedure negotiated with the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2586, the exclusive representative of its employees, to resolve any matter covered by the negotiated agreement, unless such matter is subject to resolution pursuant to statutory appeal procedures referred to in section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the Statute. 2. Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the purposes and policies of the Statute: (a) Post at its Altus Air Force Base Exchange facilities copies of the attached Notice on forms to be furnished by the Federal Labor Relations Authority. Upon receipt of such forms, they shall be signed by the Exchange Manager, or a designee, and shall be posted and maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards and other places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that such Notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Region VI, Federal Labor Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply herewith. Issued, Washington, D.C., July 15, 1986. /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun Chairman /s/ Henry B. Frazier, III Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- (1) Section 7121(a)(1) provides: Section 7121. Grievance Procedures (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, any collective bargaining agreement shall provide procedures for the settlement of grievances, including questions of arbitrability. Except as provided in subsections (d) and (e) of this section, the procedures shall be the exclusive procedures for resolving grievances which fall within its coverage. (2) Section 7121(d) and (e) provide in pertinent part: (d) An aggrieved employee affected by a prohibited personnel practice under section 2302(b)(1) of this title which also falls under the coverage of the negotiated grievance procedure may raise the matter under a statutory procedure or the negotiated procedure, but not both. . . . (e)(1) Matters covered under sections 4303 and 7512 of this title which also fall within the coverage of the negotiated grievance procedure may, in the discretion of the aggrieved employee, be raised either under the appellate procedures of section 7701 of this title or under the negotiated grievance procedure, but not both. Similar matters which arise under other personnel systems applicable to employees covered by this chapter may, in the discretion of the aggrieved employee, be raised either under the appellate procedures, if any, applicable to those matters, or under the negotiated grievance procedure, but not both. . . . (2) In matters covered under section 4303 and 7512 of this title which have been raised under the negotiated grievance procedure in accordance with this section, an arbitrator shall be governed by section 7701(c)(1) of this title, as applicable. (3) See also American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2904 and Marine Corps Finance Center, Kansas City, Missouri, 7 FLRA 188 (1981) and National Treasury Employee Union and U.S. Customs Service, Washington, D.C., 8 FLRA 3 (1982), wherein similar proposals were also held to be inconsistent with the Statute. APPENDIX NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES PURSUANT to A DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF CHAPTER 71 OF TITLE 5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT: WE WILL NOT advise bargaining unit employees that they may choose an appeal procedure as an alternative to the grievance procedure negotiated with the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2586, the exclusive representative of our employees, to resolve any matter covered by the negotiated agreement, unless such matter is subject to resolution pursuant to statutory appeal procedures referred to in section 7121(d) and (e) of the Statute. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the Statute. (Agency or Activity) Dated: . . . By: (Signature) This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional Director, Region VI, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address is: Federal Office Building, 525 Griffin Street, Suite 926, Dallas, TX 75202, and whose telephone number is: (214) 767-4996.