[ v01 p897 ]
01:0897(102)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
1 FLRA No. 102 NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION, CHAPTER 6 (Union) and INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT OFFICE (Activity) Case No. 0-NG-9 DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE PROVISION /1/ A. R.O.'S (REVENUE OFFICERS) MAY REQUEST DAILY OR CONTINUOUS PERMISSION TO WORK IN/OUT OF THEIR RESIDENCES. B. BASED UPON A REVENUE OFFICER'S REQUEST AND THE REASONS PRESENTED, THE EMPLOYER WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA IN EXERCISING THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT OR DENY THE REQUEST: 1. THE REASONABLENESS OF THE REQUEST; 2. THE WORKABILITY OF THE REQUEST; AND 3. THE EFFECT OF THE REQUEST UPON THE EFFICIENCY OF THE SERVICE. C. THE EMPLOYER AGREES THAT ALL DETERMINATIONS WILL BE MADE IN A FAIR, OBJECTIVE AND EQUITABLE MANNER. D. UPON THE EMPLOYEE'S REQUEST, THE MANAGER WILL IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS THE REASON(S) UPON WHICH THE DENIAL IS BASED. E. CONTINUOUS PERMISSION, ONCE GRANTED, MAY BE SUBJECT TO PERIODIC REVIEW BY THE GROUP MANAGER AND MAY BE WITHDRAWN UPON A NEW, CONTRARY DETERMINATION OF THE CRITERIA CONTAINED IN "B" ABOVE. F. THE PARTIES AGREE THAT THIS IS A LOCAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT, AND IT SUPPLEMENTS MDA-3. QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE DISPUTED PROVISION OF THE PARTIES' LOCALLY NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT VIOLATES SECTION 7106(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS (FSLMR) STATUTE, AS ALLEGED GENERALLY BY THE AGENCY. /2/ OPINION CONCLUSION: THE PROVISION DOES NOT VIOLATE SECTION 7106 OF THE FSLMR STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.8 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (44 FED.REG. 44740 ET SEQ. (1979)), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION THAT THE DISPUTED PROVISION IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN BECAUSE IT VIOLATES THAT SECTION OF THE STATUTE IS SET ASIDE. /3/ REASONS: THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY INDICATES THAT MANAGEMENT'S PRACTICE IN THE BARGAINING UNIT INVOLVED IS TO GRANT EMPLOYEES' REQUESTS TO WORK FROM THEIR HOMES UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. /4/ THE UNION ARGUES THAT THE PROVISION DISPUTED IN THE INSTANT CASE IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7106(B)(2) OF THE STATUTE /5/ SINCE IT CONSTITUTES MERELY THE PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT WILL OBSERVE IN EXERCISING ITS RETAINED RIGHTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PRACTICE OF SOMETIMES ALLOWING AN EMPLOYEE TO WORK FROM HIS OR HER HOME. THE AGENCY, AS INDICATED, CONTENDS THAT THE PROVISION VIOLATES MANAGEMENT'S RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 7106(A) OF THE STATUTE. /6/ SECTION 7106 OF THE STATUTE SPECIFIED, IN SUBSECTION (A), VARIOUS RIGHTS RESERVED TO AGENCY MANAGEMENT. /7/ SUBSECTION (B), HOWEVER, PROVIDES THAT MANAGEMENT'S EXERCISE OF ANY RIGHTS CONTAINED IN SUBSECTION (A) DOES NOT PRECLUDE NEGOTIATIONS ON THE PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS WILL OBSERVE IN EXERCISING THOSE RIGHTS. /8/ THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE STATUTE REFLECTS THE INTENT, IN REGARD TO THE DUTY TO BARGAIN ON THE PROCEDURES MANAGEMENT WILL OBSERVE IN EXERCISING ANY RESERVED RIGHTS UNDER THE STATUTE, TO AUTHORIZE UNIONS TO NEGOTIATE FULLY ON SUCH PROCEDURES, UNLESS SUCH NEGOTIATIONS WOULD PREVENT THE AGENCY FROM ACTING AT ALL. /9/ TURNING TO THE DISPUTED PROVISION, IT PRINCIPALLY RELATES, AS A WHOLE, TO AGENCY MANAGEMENT'S GRANTING OR DENYING THE REQUEST OF INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE BARGAINING UNIT (REVENUE OFFICERS) TO WORK "IN/OUT OF THEIR RESIDENCES." SECTION A WHICH IS NOT IN DISPUTE MERELY REFLECTS THE EXISTENCE OF THE AGENCY'S PRACTICE TO CONSIDER SUCH REQUESTS. (AS NOTED BEFORE, THE UNION TACITLY CONCEDES THAT THE EXISTENCE AND CONTINUATION OF THIS PRACTICE IS A MATTER SOLELY RESERVED TO MANAGEMENT'S DISCRETION.) SECTIONS B, C, AND E, DISPUTED HEREIN, DELINEATE THE PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT WILL FOLLOW WHEN CONSIDERING SUCH REQUESTS. IN THIS REGARD, SECTION B ESTABLISHES "REASONABLENESS," "WORKABILITY" AND "EFFECT OF THE REQUEST UPON THE EFFICIENCY OF THE SERVICE" AS CRITERIA WHICH MANAGEMENT MUST CONSIDER IN EXERCISING ITS AUTHORITY TO GRANT OR DENY A REQUEST. THESE CRITERIA (WHICH DERIVATIVELY APPLY ALSO UNDER SECTION E) ARE VERY GENERAL AND ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE: THE LANGUAGE OF THE PROVISION DOES NOT SPECIFY THEIR EXCLUSIVITY AND, FURTHERMORE, THE UNION UNEQUIVOCALLY STATES IN THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY THAT THEY ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE BUT ARE TO BE APPLIED BY THE RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL "AMONG ANY OTHER CRITERIA HE OR SHE WISHES TO CONSIDER." SECTION C MERELY ESTABLISHES A GENERAL STANDARD FOR MANAGEMENT'S DETERMINATIONS WITH REGARD TO EMPLOYEE REQUESTS: THAT THEY BE FAIR, OBJECTIVE AND EQUITABLE. SECTION E MAKES THE NONEXCLUSIVE CRITERIA FOR GRANTING OR DENYING REQUESTS, MENTIONED ABOVE, APPLICABLE ALSO TO EXERCISES OF MANAGEMENT DECISIONAL AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE OR WITHDRAW PERMISSION, PREVIOUSLY GRANTED, FOR AN EMPLOYEE TO WORK FROM HIS OR HER RESIDENCE. IT IS PLAIN FROM THE LANGUAGE OF SECTIONS B, C, AND E OF THE PROVISION AND FROM THE UNION'S CLEAR STATEMENT TO THE AUTHORITY REGARDING THE NONEXCLUSIVITY OF THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED IN SECTION B, THAT THESE SECTIONS SOLELY ARE CONCERNED WITH THE PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT WILL OBSERVE IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO GRANT, DENY OR, HAVING ONCE GRANTED, TO CONTINUE OR WITHDRAW PERMISSION FOR A BARGAINING UNIT MEMBER TO WORK FROM HIS OR HER HOME IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING AGENCY PRACTICE. FURTHERMORE, THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT THESE PROCEDURES WILL PREVENT MANAGEMENT FROM ACTING AT ALL ON EMPLOYEES' REQUEST FOR SUCH PERMISSION. ACCORDINGLY, THE PROCEDURES IN QUESTION ARE WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7106(B)(2) OF THE STATUTE /10/ AND THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION TO THE CONTRARY MUST BE SET ASIDE. FINALLY, SECTION F OF THE PROVISION STATES THAT "THE PARTIES AGREE THAT THIS IS A LOCAL AGREEMENT SUPPLEMENTING 'MDA-3'" (APPARENTLY ADVERTING TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AT A HIGHER LEVEL). THE AGENCY PROVIDES NO SUPPORT OR EXPLANATION FOR ITS ALLEGATION THAT SECTION F OF THE PROVISION VIOLATES SECTION 7106 OF THE STATUTE AND NO VIOLATION IS OTHERWISE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD IN THIS CASE. ACCORDINGLY THE ALLEGATION OF THE AGENCY THAT SECTION F OF THE PROVISION IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN BECAUSE IT VIOLATES SECTION 7106 OF THE STATUTE MUST BE SET ASIDE. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., AUGUST 23, 1979 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY /1/ THE PARTIES NEGOTIATED THE DISPUTED PROVISION AS PART OF THEIR LOCAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT. DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS PURSUANT TO SECTION 7114(C) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (92 STAT. 1203), THE AGENCY DISAPPROVED THE UNDERSCORED PORTIONS OF THE PROVISION. SECTION 7114(C) PROVIDES THAT: (C)(1) AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN ANY AGENCY AND AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE HEAD OF THE AGENCY. (2) THE HEAD OF THE AGENCY SHALL APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE AGREEMENT IS EXECUTED IF THE AGREEMENT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE LAW, RULE, OR REGULATION (UNLESS THE AGENCY HAS GRANTED AN EXCEPTION TO THE PROVISION). (3) IF THE HEAD OF THE AGENCY DOES NOT APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITHIN THE 30-DAY PERIOD, THE AGREEMENT SHALL TAKE EFFECT AND SHALL BE BINDING ON THE AGENCY AND THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE LAW, RULES, OR REGULATIONS. (4) A LOCAL AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO A NATIONAL OR OTHER CONTROLLING AGREEMENT AT A HIGHER LEVEL SHALL BE APPROVED UNDER THE PROCEDURES OF THE CONTROLLING AGREEMENT, OR, IF NONE, UNDER REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE AGENCY. /2/ SECTION 7106(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (92 STAT. 1198) PROVIDES: SECTION 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-- (1) TO DETERMINE THE MISSION, BUDGET, ORGANIZATION, NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, AND INTERNAL SECURITY PRACTICES OF THE AGENCY; AND-- (2) IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS-- (A) TO HIRE, ASSIGN, DIRECT, LAYOFF, AND RETAIN EMPLOYEES IN THE AGENCY, OR TO SUSPEND, REMOVE, REDUCE IN GRADE OR PAY, OR TAKE OTHER DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST SUCH EMPLOYEES; (B) TO ASSIGN WORK, TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO CONTRACTING OUT, AND TO DETERMINE THE PERSONNEL BY WHICH AGENCY OPERATIONS SHALL BE CONDUCTED. (C) WITH RESPECT TO FILLING POSITIONS, TO MAKE SELECTIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS FROM-- (I) AMONG PROPERLY RANKED AND CERTIFIED CANDIDATES FOR PROMOTION; OR (II) ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE SOURCE; AND (D) TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTIONS MAY BE NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE AGENCY MISSION DURING EMERGENCIES. /3/ IN SO DECIDING THAT THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO JUDGEMENT AS TO THE MERITS OF THE PROPOSAL. /4/ THE FOLLOWING "MEMORANDUM OF PRACTICE" WAS PROVIDED TO THE UNION BY THE CHIEF, COLLECTION DIVISION, NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT: SUBJECT: PRACTICE WITH RESPECT TO REVENUE OFFICERS PERFORMING OFFICIAL DUTIES AT THEIR RESIDENCE FOR LIMITED AND EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME, EMPLOYEES WILL BE ALLOWED, UPON REQUEST, TO WORK FROM THEIR HOMES WHEN THEY CAN PROVIDE ADEQUATE EVIDENCE THAT IT WILL IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE SERVICE. GROUP MANAGERS WILL GRANT THEIR APPROVAL TO INDIVIDUAL REVENUE OFFICERS BASED ON THE EFFICIENCY OF THE PRACTICE, WITH DUE CONSIDERATION FOR DISCLOSURE, THE PUBLIC IMAGE OF THE SERVICE, THE POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE, AND OTHER FACTORS. THE BURDEN OF PROOF WILL REMAIN WITH THE EMPLOYEE, AND GROUP MANAGEMENT WILL RETAIN THE RIGHT TO DENY OR WITHDRAW SUCH PERMISSION WHENEVER IT IS DEEMED NECESSARY. /5/ SECTION 7106TB)(2) OF THE STATUTE PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS: (B) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PRECLUDE ANY AGENCY AND ANY LABOR ORGANIZATION FROM NEGOTIATING-- . . . . (2) PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS OF THE AGENCY WILL OBSERVE IN EXERCISING ANY AUTHORITY UNDER THIS SECTION(.) /6/ NOTE 2, SUPRA. MANAGEMENT DID NOT SUBMIT A STATEMENT OF ITS POSITION SETTING FORTH ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS GENERAL ALLEGATION. /7/ NOTE 2, SUPRA. THE UNION TACITLY CONCEDES THAT THESE RIGHTS ENCOMPASS DETERMINING WHETHER TO ALLOW AN EMPLOYEE TO WORK FROM HIS OR HER HOME. /8/ NOTE 5, SUPRA. /9/ IN THIS REGARD, THE JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON CONFERENCE STATED IN THE CONFERENCE REPORT WHICH ACCOMPANIED THE BILL WHICH WAS ENACTED AND SIGNED INTO LAW, AS FOLLOWS: 3. SENATE SECTION 7218(B) PROVIDES THAT NEGOTIATIONS ON PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE EXER(ISE OF AUTHORITY RESERVED TO MANAGEMENT SHALL NOT UNREASONABLY DELAY THE EXERCISE BY MANAGEMENT OF ITS AUTHORITY TO ACT ON SUCH MATTERS. ANY NEGOTIATIONS ON PROCEDURES GOVERNING MATTERS OTHERWISE RESERVED TO AGENCY DISCRETION BY SUBSECTION (A) MAY NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF ACTUALLY NEGATING THE AUTHORITY AS RESERVED TO THE AGENCY BY SUBSECTION (A). THERE ARE NO COMPARABLE HOUSE PROVISIONS. THE CONFERENCE REPORT DELETES THESE PROVISIONS. HOWEVER, THE CONFEREES WISH TO EMPHASIZE THAT NEGOTIATIONS ON SUCH PROCEDURES SHOULD NOT BE CONDUCTED IN A WAY THAT PREVENTS THE AGENCY FROM ACTING AT ALL, OR IN A WAY THAT PREVENTS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEGOTIATING FULLY ON PROCEDURES . . . S. REP NO. 95-1272, 95TH CONG., 2D SESS. 158(1978). THUS, THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, IN APPROVING SECTION 7106(B)(2) OF THE STATUTE DID NOT ADOPT THE LANGUAGE IN THE SENATE BILL (S. 2640) WHICH PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 7218. BASIC PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENTS . . . . (B) NOTHING IN SUBSECTION (A) OF THIS SECTION SHALL PRECLUDE THE PARTIES FROM NEGOTIATING-- (1) PROCEDURES WHICH MANAGEMENT WILL OBSERVE IN EXERCISING ITS AUTHORITY TO DECIDE OR ACT IN MATTERS RESERVED UNDER SUCH SUBSECTION; OR (2) APPROPRIATE ARRANGEMENTS FOR EMPLOYEES ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE IMPACT OF MANAGEMENT'S EXERCISING ITS AUTHORITY TO DECIDE OR ACT IN MATTERS RESERVED UNDER SUCH SUBSECTION, EXCEPT THAT SUCH NEGOTIATIONS SHALL NOT UNREASONABLY DELAY THE EXERCISE BY MANAGEMENT OF ITS AUTHORITY TO DECIDE OR ACT, AND SUCH PROCEDURES AND ARRANGEMENTS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ANY LAW OR REGULATION DESCRIBED IN 7215(C) OF THIS TITLE, AND SHALL NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF NEGATING THE AUTHORITY RESERVED UNDER SUBSECTION (A). /10/ NOTE 5, SUPRA.