[ v05 p104 ]
05:0104(20)RO
The decision of the Authority follows:
5 FLRA No. 20
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 1805, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-33
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
PANAMA AREA METAL TRADES
COUNCIL
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-34
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
FIRE FIGHTERS, LOCAL 13, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-36
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE,
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 900, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-39
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
NATIONAL MARITIME UNION;
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF
MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS,
PANAMA AREA METAL TRADES
COUNCIL
Petitioners Case No. 6-RO-55
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 14, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-65
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE,
COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 900, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-66
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
Agency
and
DISTRICT 1, PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT,
MARINE ENGINEERS BENEFICIAL
ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO
Petitioner Case No. 6-RO-69
DECISION, ORDER AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
UPON PETITIONS FILED WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY UNDER
SECTION 7111(B) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
STATUTE, 5 U.S.C. 7101-7135, A CONSOLIDATED HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE A
HEARING OFFICER OF THE AUTHORITY. THE AUTHORITY HAS REVIEWED THE
HEARING OFFICER'S RULINGS MADE AT THE HEARING AND FINDS THAT THEY ARE
FREE FROM PREJUDICIAL ERROR. THE RULINGS ARE HEREBY AFFIRMED.
UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THESE CASES, INCLUDING BRIEFS TIMELY FILED
BY THE AGENCY (THE COMMISSION); A COALITION CONSISTING OF THREE UNIONS
(THE NATIONAL MARITIME UNION, THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS,
MATES AND PILOTS, AND THE PANAMA AREA METAL TRADES COUNCIL) AND REFERRED
TO AS MARITIME/METAL TRADES COUNCIL (M/MTC); THE INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS, LOCAL 13 (IAFF); AND DISTRICT 1, PACIFIC
COAST DISTRICT, MARINE ENGINEERS BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION (MEBA); AND
REPLY BRIEFS FILED BY THE COMMISSION, M/MTC AND MEBA, THE AUTHORITY
FINDS: /1/
THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED CLAIM TO REPRESENT CERTAIN EMPLOYEES
OF THE AGENCY.
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-33, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 1805 (AFGE L. 1805) FILED A PETITION FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES EMPLOYED BY THE PANAMA
CANAL COMMISSION.
EXCLUDED: ALL NON-PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES, MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS,
SUPERVISORS AND EMPLOYEES
DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C. 7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND (7).
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-34, THE PANAMA AREA METAL TRADES COUNCIL (MTC) FILED
A PETITION FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL PRODUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND CRAFT LOCK OPERATING
EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING
JOURNEYMEN, APPRENTICES, TRAINEES, TEMPORARY AND PROBATIONARY
EMPLOYEES, EMPLOYED IN THE
EMPLOYER'S LOCKS DIVISION OF THE MARINE BUREAU AND THE MAINTENANCE,
INDUSTRIAL, ELECTRICAL
(INCLUDING POWER AND COMMUNICATIONS BRANCHES) AND DREDGING DIVISIONS
OF THE ENGINEERING AND
CONSTRUCTION BUREAUS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO APPRENTICES,
JOURNEYMEN, LEADERS,
INSPECTORS, LOCKMASTERS, CONTROL HOUSE OPERATORS, OPERATIONS GENERAL
FOREMEN, GENERAL FOREMEN,
LEAD FOREMEN, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL SUPERVISORS, PLANNERS,
ESTIMATORS AND PROGRESSMEN.
EXCLUDED: CLERICALS, SECURITY GUARDS, HELPERS, TOWING LOCOMOTIVE
OPERATORS, BOATMEN AND
LINEHANDLERS, EMPLOYEES EMPLOYED IN PERSONNEL WORK AND PROFESSIONAL
EMPLOYEES.
(AT THE HEARING AND IN ITS BRIEF, THE MTC STATED THAT IT SEEKS THIS
UNIT ONLY AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT PETITIONED FOR
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-55.)
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-36, THE IAFF PETITIONED FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION FIRE DIVISION FIRE FIGHTERS,
DRIVER-OPERATORS, SERGEANTS, LIEUTENANTS, CAPTAINS AND ASSISTANT
CHIEFS.
EXCLUDED: PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION FIRE DIVISION FIRE CHIEFS AND ALL
CLERICAL STAFF.
AT THE HEARING IAFF AMENDED ITS PETITION TO EXCLUDE ASSISTANT CHIEFS
FROM THE PROPOSED UNIT.
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-39, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 900 (AFSCME L. 900) FILED A PETITION FOR A
UNIT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION.
EXCLUDED: ALL PERSONNEL EXEMPTED BY TITLE VII.
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-55, THE M/MTC PETITIONED FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES AND NON-PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYED BY THE PANAMA
CANAL COMMISSION.
EXCLUDED: MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES DEFINED IN 5 U.S.C.
7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6)
AND (7).
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-65, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 14 (AFGE L. 14) FILED A PETITION FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL POLICE DIVISION.
EXCLUDED: ALL MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS AND PERSONNEL OFFICIALS DESCRIBED
IN 5
U.S.C. 7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND (7).
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-66, AFSCME L. 900 FILED A PETITION FOR A UNIT
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: PANAMANIANS (PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION FIRE DIVISION) FIRE
FIGHTERS,
DRIVER-OPERATORS, SERGEANTS, LIEUTENANTS, CAPTAINS,
ALL CLERICAL STAFF.
EXCLUDED: PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION FIRE DIVISION FIRE CHIEF AND
ASSISTANT CHIEFS.
(AT THE HEARING AFSCME L. 900 INDICATED THAT IT DESIRES THIS UNIT
ONLY AS AN ALTERNATIVE IN THE EVENT A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT IS NOT FOUND
APPROPRIATE.)
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-69, MEBA FILED A PETITION FOR A UNIT DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
INCLUDED: ALL LICENSED MARINE ENGINEERS AS DEFINED IN TITLE 35,
SUBCHAPTER C, PART 119,
CFR, AND THOSE IN AN APPROVED TRAINING PROGRAM LEADING TO SUCH
LICENSING.
EXCLUDED: MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES DEFINED IN 5 U.S.C.
7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6)
AND (7).
WITH RESPECT TO THE PETITION FILED IN 6-RO-34 THE INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS (IOMMP) AND THE NATIONAL
MARITIME UNION (NMU) SOUGHT INTERVENTION BASED ON SUBMISSION OF A
SHOWING OF INTEREST.
NMU SIMILARLY SOUGHT INTERVENTION OF THE PETITION FILED IN CASE NO.
6-RO-36 AS DID AFSCME L. 900.
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-39 AFGE L. 14 SUBMITTED A SHOWING OF INTEREST IN A
EFFORT TO INTERVENE.
AFSCME L. 900 INDICATED THAT IT WISHED THE SHOWING OF INTEREST WHICH
IT HAD SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ITS PETITION IN CASE NO. 6-RO-39 TO BE
CONSIDERED AS AN INTERVENTION IN CONNECTION WITH THE PETITION FILED IN
CASE NO. 6-RO-55.
IN CASE NO. 6-RO-65, THE M/MTC SOUGHT TO INTERVENE VIA SUBMISSION OF
A SHOWING OF INTEREST.
AT THE CONSOLIDATED HEARING CONDUCTED IN THE CASES A MOTION WAS MADE
BY THE M/MTC, WHICH WAS JOINED BY AFSCME L. 900, THAT ALL PARTIES TO THE
CASES BE CONSIDERED INTERVENORS IN ALL PETITIONS. IAFF OPPOSED THAT
MOTION. AT THE CONSOLIDATED HEARING AFSCME L. 900, THE M/MTC AND THE
AFGE LOCALS INDICATED THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN APPEARING ON THE
BALLOT IN ANY UNIT WHICH THE AUTHORITY FOUND APPROPRIATE. IAFF
INDICATED THAT IT WISHED TO PARTICIPATE IN AN ELECTION FOR ANY UNIT
CONSISTING OF FIRE FIGHTERS ONLY. MEBA INDICATED THAT IT WAS INTERESTED
IN PARTICIPATING IN AN ELECTION FOR ANY UNIT CONSISTING OF MARINE
ENGINEERS AND TRAINEES ONLY.
QUESTIONS RAISED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PETITIONS INCLUDE THE
FOLLOWING: THE JURISDICTION OF THE AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO THE
PETITIONS AND THE STATUS OF VARIOUS PARTICIPATING LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO THE LABOR CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA; TIMELINESS OF
VARIOUS PETITIONS, STATUS OF CERTAIN LABOR ORGANIZATIONS AS INTERVENORS
ON VARIOUS PETITIONS; APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PETITIONED FOR UNITS; AND
THE ELIGIBILITY OF EMPLOYEES IN VARIOUS POSITIONS TO VOTE AS WELL AS THE
INCLUSION OF CERTAIN GROUPS OF EMPLOYEES IN ANY UNIT(S) FOUND
APPROPRIATE.
JURISDICTION OF THE AUTHORITY
THE PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION, ON OCTOBER 1, 1979, PURSUANT TO SECTION
1101 OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT OF 1979 /2/ UNDERTOOK THE RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PANAMA CANAL AND THE FACILITIES
AND APPURTENANCES RELATED THERETO. SECTION 1271 OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT
OF 1979 SPECIFICALLY EXTENDED COVERAGE OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE TO, AMONG OTHERS, EMPLOYEES OF THE
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION. /3/ IN VIEW OF THE EXPRESS PROVISIONS OF THE
PANAMA CANAL ACT AND THE AUTHORITY'S FUNCTION AND ROLE WITH RESPECT TO
ADMINISTERING THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE,
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT IT HAS JURISDICTION IN THE INSTANT CASES.
A QUESTION HAS ALSO BEEN RAISED WITH RESPECT TO THE STANDING OF
SEVERAL OF THE PETITIONING LABOR ORGANIZATIONS BASED ON AN ALLEGATION
THAT THEY ARE NOT DULY CONSTITUTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LABOR CODE OF
THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA. SECTION 1271 OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT CONTAINS
NO REQUIREMENT FOR SUCH CONFORMANCE. INDEED SUBSECTION (B) OF THAT
SECTION, WHICH IS QUOTED IN FOOTNOTE 3, SPECIFICALLY PROVIDES THAT LABOR
RELATIONS OF THE COMMISSION ARE TO BE GOVERNED AND REGULATED SOLELY BY
THE APPLICABLE LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES. THUS,
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT CONFORMANCE WITH THE LABOR CODE OF THE REPUBLIC
OF PANAMA IS NOT A REQUISITE FOR PARTICIPATION BY A LABOR ORGANIZATION
IN THE PROCEEDINGS INVOLVED HEREIN.
TIMELINESS OF PETITIONS
SEVERAL QUESTIONS REGARDING THE TIMELINESS OF CERTAIN PETITIONS WITH
RESPECT TO QUALIFYING AS CROSS-PETITIONS ON OTHER PETITIONS WERE
REFERRED TO THE AUTHORITY. THE QUESTION OF TIMELINESS IN CONNECTION
WITH GRANTING INTERVENTION ON THE VARIOUS PETITIONS HAS ALSO BEEN
REFERRED TO THE AUTHORITY.
SECTION 2422.5(B) OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2422.5(B))
PROVIDES THAT:
A LABOR ORGANIZATION SEEKING EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION IN A UNIT
DIFFERENT FROM THE UNIT
PETITIONED FOR, AND WHICH INCLUDES ANY OR ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES IN
THAT UNIT, MUST FILE A
PETITION . . . WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF POSTING OF THE
NOTICE OF THE INITIAL
PETITION . . . UNLESS GOOD CAUSE IS SHOWN FOR EXTENDING THE PERIOD.
SIMILARLY, REQUESTS TO INTERVENE MUST BE MADE WITHIN THE 10-DAY
PERIOD (SECTION 2422.5(C) OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS). UNREFUTED
INFORMATION SUPPLIED AT THE CONSOLIDATED HEARING INDICATED THAT THE
AVERAGE MAILING TIME FROM PANAMA TO THE UNITED STATES IS 10 DAYS.
MOREOVER, IT WAS STATED THAT SOME PARTIES ENCOUNTERED DIFFICULTIES IN
OBTAINING COPIES OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS AND, HENCE, ASCERTAINING
THE REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE REPRESENTATIONAL
PROCESS. IN THE AUTHORITY'S VIEW THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTANCES INVOLVED
AND THE FACT THAT AN ENTIRELY NEW PROGRAM OF LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
WAS REPLACING A LONG-ESTABLISHED ONE CONSTITUTE EXTRAORDINARY
CIRCUMSTANCES AND WARRANT WAIVER OF THE TIME LIMITS REFERRED TO ABOVE AS
PERMITTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 2429.23(B) OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS.
/4/
INTERVENTION
AS INDICATED EARLIER HEREIN, IN SEVERAL OF THE PETITIONS, VARIOUS
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS HAVE SOUGHT TO INTERVENE. SOME SOUGHT INTERVENTION
BASED ON SUBMISSION OF SHOWING OF INTEREST AND SOME EXPRESSED, AT THE
HEARING, A DESIRE TO INTERVENE BASED ON SUCH GROUNDS AS THEIR
REPRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEES IN THE PREDECESSOR ORGANIZATIONS OF THE
COMMISSION.
THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT REVEALS A NUMBER OF
EXPRESSIONS OF SENTIMENT ON THE PART OF THE CONGRESS THAT DISRUPTIONS
DURING THE TRANSITION PERIOD RELATING TO THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF THE
CANAL ZONE FROM THE UNITED STATES TO THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA BE
MINIMIZED. IT ALSO APPEARS THAT A MAJOR CONCERN OF THE CONGRESS WAS
THAT THE INTERESTS OF THE EMPLOYEES INVOLVED BE ADEQUATELY PROTECTED.
MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES IN ITS REPORT
ON THE LEGISLATION WHICH ULTIMATELY BECAME THE PANAMA CANAL ACT STATED:
THIRD, IN ARRIVING AT ITS RECOMMENDED VERSION OF THE IMPLEMENTING
LEGISLATION, THE
COMMITTEE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE WELFARE AND SECURITY OF UNITED
STATES CITIZENS AND
OTHER PERSONS WORKING FOR THE COMPANY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
IN PANAMA. . . . (T)HE
DISRUPTION IN THEIR WORKING ENVIRONMENT AND EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS
INEVITABLY INCIDENT TO THE
TRANSFER OF CONTROL OVER THE CANAL ZONE TO PANAMA SHOULD BE KEPT TO A
MINIMUM. (S. REP. NO. 255, 96TH CONG., 1ST SESS. 3(1979).)
SIMILARLY, THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
STATED:
THE ABOLISHMENT OF THE COMPANY AND THE ZONE GOVERNMENT AND THE
CREATION OF THE PANAMA CANAL
COMMISSION WILL HAVE A DRAMATIC EFFECT ON EMPLOYEES, BOTH UNITED
STATES CITIZENS AND FOREIGN
NATIONALS, OF THE COMPANY, THE ZONE GOVERNMENT, AND OTHER UNITED
STATES AGENCIES CONDUCTING
OPERATIONS IN THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA. THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT TO
TITLE III OF THE
IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION . . . IS DESIGNED TO EASE THIS TRANSITION
FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS
. . . . (H.R. REP. NO. 94, PART III, 96TH CONG., 1ST SESS. 24
(1979).)
IN KEEPING WITH THE EXPRESSED DESIRE OF CONGRESS THAT DISRUPTION OF
THE WORK ENVIRONMENT AND WORKING CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION BE KEPT TO A MINIMUM, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THOSE LABOR
ORGANIZATIONS WHICH HELD RECOGNITION FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL
COMPANY AND CANAL ZONE GOVERNMENT, AND WHICH HAVE EXPRESSED AN INTEREST
IN PARTICIPATING IN THE VARIOUS REPRESENTATION PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING
THOSE EMPLOYEES, SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO INTERVENE IN THE RELEVANT
PETITIONS. AS SET FORTH LATER HEREIN, SUCH REQUESTS TO INTERVENE ARE
HEREBY GRANTED.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ON APPROPRIATENESS OF UNITS CASE
NOS. 6-RO-39 AND 6-RO-55
AS NOTED EARLIER, SOME OF THE UNIONS WHO ARE PARTIES TO THIS
PROCEEDING SEEK TO REPRESENT A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT. IT IS THE MISSION
AND FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THE PANAMA CANAL.
(PRIOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION THOSE FUNCTIONS HAD BEEN
CARRIED OUT BY THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY AND THE CANAL ZONE GOVERNMENT.)
THE COMMISSION ACCOMPLISHES THIS MISSION THROUGH A SUPERVISORY BOARD
CONSISTING OF NINE MEMBERS. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE
COMMISSION IS THE ADMINISTRATOR WHO EXERCISES GENERAL AND ACTIVE CONTROL
OVER THE COMMISSION'S OFFICES, BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS AND GENERAL
SUPERVISION OVER ITS OFFICIALS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES.
WITHIN THE COMMISSION ARE THREE MAJOR OPERATING BUREAUS-- THE MARINE
BUREAU, THE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION BUREAU AND THE GENERAL SERVICES
BUREAU.
THE MISSION AND FUNCTION OF THE MARINE BUREAU RELATE TO THE CONTROL
OF MARITIME TRAFFIC THROUGH THE CANAL AND ITS TERMINAL PORTS. THE
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION BUREAU IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREPARATION
OF ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGNS, INVESTIGATIONS AND ESTIMATES;
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES; AND FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF
FACILITIES AND THE WATERWAY. THE GENERAL SERVICES BUREAU IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR PROVIDING SUPPLY, LOGISTICS, PROTECTION AND SUPPORT SERVICES.
WITHIN THESE BUREAUS ARE VARIOUS NUMBERS OF DIVISIONS WHICH ARE IN TURN
COMPOSED OF VARYING NUMBERS AND LEVELS OF SUBORDINATE ORGANIZATIONS.
IN ADDITION, THERE ARE SEVERAL STAFF UNITS-- NOTABLY, THE OFFICE OF
EXECUTIVE PLANNING, THE OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE OFFICE OF
THE GENERAL COUNSEL, THE OFFICE OF PROTOCOL, THE OFFICE OF HEALTH AND
SAFETY, THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION, THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
ADMINISTRATION, THE OFFICE OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, THE OFFICE OF EQUAL
OPPORTUNITY, THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, THE OFFICE OF OMBUDSMAN,
THE OFFICE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY.
THE WORK FORCE OF THE COMMISSION IS COMPOSED OF CRAFTSMEN, LABORERS,
AND EMPLOYEES IN A VARIETY OF PROFESSIONAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL
AND CLERICAL CATEGORIES. THE APPROXIMATELY 8,600 EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION ARE SITUATED AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS ALONG THE 50 MILE EXPANSE
OF THE CANAL, BUT PRIMARILY AT BALBOA ON THE PACIFIC SIDE, COLON AND
CHRISTOBAL ON THE ATLANTIC SIDE, THE MIRAFLORES LOCKS, THE PEDRO MIGUEL
LOCKS, THE GATUN LOCKS AND GAMBOA. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT AT THE
VARIOUS WORKSITES EMPLOYEES FROM THE VARIOUS BUREAUS OF THE COMMISSION
WORK IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WITH EACH OTHER. THERE IS SOME TRANSFER AND
INTERCHANGE OF EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE COMMISSION; HOWEVER, THE NATURE AND
DEGREE OF EMPLOYEE MOVEMENT AMONG THE BUREAUS AND DIVISIONS VARY, AND
LARGELY DEPEND ON THE SIMILARITY OF THE JOB SKILLS INVOLVED. EMPLOYEES
WORK VARIOUS HOURS AND SHIFTS THROUGHOUT THE COMMISSION DEPENDING ON THE
FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND OPERATIONAL NECESSITIES OF THE DIVISION OR
OFFICE TO WHICH THEY ARE ASSIGNED.
THE COMMISSION'S PAY SYSTEM IS DIVIDED INTO FOUR CATEGORIES:
NONMANUAL WHICH PARALLELS THE GENERAL SCHEDULE SYSTEM; MANUAL WHICH
PARALLELS THE WAGE GRADE SYSTEM; SPECIAL CATEGORIES WHICH INCLUDE
GROUPS SUCH AS PILOTS, DREDGE AND TOWBOAT PERSONNEL, FIRE FIGHTERS,
POLICE, ETC.; AND EXCLUDED CATEGORIES WHICH INCLUDE, FOR EXAMPLE,
COMMISSION EXECUTIVES. COMPUTATION OF OVERTIME PAY VARIES WITH THE PAY
CATEGORY INVOLVED.
IN THE AREA OF FRINGE BENEFITS SOME OF THE BENEFITS ESTABLISHED BY
UNITED STATES STATUTES (SUCH AS FEDERAL HEALTH BENEFITS) ARE APPLICABLE
TO THE COMMISSION AND SOME ARE NOT. ALSO, IN THE AREAS OF CERTAIN TYPES
OF LEAVE AND RETIREMENT, BENEFITS ARE NOT UNIFORMLY APPLICABLE TO ALL
COMMISSION EMPLOYEES.
THE COMMISSION CONTINUES TO OPERATE UNDER A CANAL ZONE MERIT SYSTEM
WHICH EXISTED PRIOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMISSION. THE
PERSONNEL SYSTEM IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REVISED; HOWEVER, THE ONLY
REVISIONS WHICH HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING WERE
THOSE IMMEDIATELY REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PANAMA CANAL ACT.
THE PANAMA CANAL PERSONNEL MANUAL IS A SET OF RULES AND REGULATIONS
WHICH APPLY TO ALL COMMISSION EMPLOYEES WHICH ARE FOLLOWED IN
ADMINISTERING PERSONNEL MATTERS IN THE COMMISSION.
OVERALL AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION AND
MANAGEMENT RESTS WITH THE COMMISSION'S OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
ADMINISTRATION. PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE FORMULATED BY
THIS OFFICE. ACCORDING TO INFORMATION ELICITED AT THE HEARING, EACH
BUREAU HAS AN EMPLOYEE RELATIONS OFFICER ASSIGNED TO THE BUREAU
DIRECTOR'S STAFF.
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT EACH BUREAU ALSO HAS A LABOR RELATIONS
OFFICER ASSIGNED TO THE BUREAU DIRECTOR'S STAFF. THE DUTIES OF THE
LABOR RELATIONS OFFICER WITHIN THE BUREAUS RELATE TO ATTEMPTING
RESOLUTION OF PROBLEMS THAT MIGHT ARISE WITHIN THE DIVISIONS.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR OVERSEEING THE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS PROGRAM OF
THE COMMISSION IS LODGED IN THE OFFICE OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS-- ONE OF
THE STAFF UNITS WHICH REPORTS TO THE ADMINISTRATOR.
HISTORICALLY, THOSE ORGANIZATIONS WHICH WERE THE PREDECESSORS OF THE
COMMISSION WERE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE UNDER E.O. 10988 AND E.O. 11491,
AS AMENDED. THEY DID, HOWEVER, GRANT LIMITED FORMS OF RECOGNITION TO
EMPLOYEE UNIONS. UNDER THESE RECOGNITIONS, NO CONTRACTS WERE NEGOTIATED
AND DEALINGS WITH THE UNIONS WERE CONSULTATIVE IN NATURE. NUMEROUS
GRANTS OF RECOGNITION WERE MADE, SOME OVERLAPPING. BECAUSE THE LABOR
RELATIONS SYSTEMS DEVELOPED ALLOWED SUPERVISORS TO BE INCLUDED IN UNITS,
SOME OF THE RECOGNITIONS GRANTED WERE FOR UNITS WHICH DID, IN FACT,
INCLUDE SUPERVISORS.
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT A UNIT CONSISTING OF ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION IS APPROPRIATE. IN SO FINDING, THE AUTHORITY
NOTES THAT THE EMPLOYEES INVOLVED ARE ENGAGED IN A COMMON MISSION AND
FUNCTION AND THAT THE RECORD INDICATES THAT COMMISSION OPERATIONS TEND
TO BE INTEGRATED AND INVOLVE A BROAD RANGE OF ITS BUREAUS, DIVISIONS AND
EMPLOYEES. THEY ARE UNDER THE COMMON OVERALL SUPERVISION OF THE BOARD
AND THE ADMINISTRATOR. THEY ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME PERSONNEL POLICIES
AND PRACTICES AS SET FORTH IN THE PANAMA CANAL PERSONNEL MANUAL AND ARE
SERVICED BY A CENTRALIZED PERSONNEL OFFICE WHICH FORMULATES PERSONNEL
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE COMMISSION. THE LABOR RELATIONS
FUNCTION IS ALSO LODGED IN A CENTRAL OFFICE, ALTHOUGH MOST MAJOR BUREAUS
APPARENTLY HAVE A LABOR RELATIONS OFFICER ASSIGNED TO AID IN
IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM IN EACH BUREAU. ADDITIONALLY, THE GENERAL
SERVICES BUREAU AND STAFF UNITS, LISTED ABOVE, PROVIDE SUPPORT AND OTHER
SERVICES TO THE VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE COMMISSION.
IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT, AS INDICATED ABOVE, THE EMPLOYEES OF THE
VARIOUS BUREAUS WORK IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO EACH OTHER, AND SHARE
PERSONNEL POLICIES, PRACTICES, OVERALL SUPERVISION AND SOME FRINGE
BENEFITS IN COMMON, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT A SIMILARITY OF WORKING
CONDITIONS EXISTS THROUGHOUT THE COMMISSION. MOREOVER, IT APPEARS THAT
SOME TRANSFER AND INTERCHANGE AS WELL AS WORK CONTACTS OCCUR AMONG
EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO THE VARIOUS DIVISIONS AND BUREAUS. BASED ON THE
FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT THE EMPLOYEES IN
THE PROPOSED UNIT SHARE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF INTEREST
AND THAT THE PROPOSED UNIT WILL PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS WITH, AND
EFFICIENCY OF OPERATIONS OF, THE COMMISSION. (SEE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE, U.S. MILITARY ENLISTMENT PROCESSING COMMAND, HEADQUARTERS,
WESTERN SECTOR, OAKLAND ARMY BASE, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, 5 FLRA NO.
1(1981).)
CASE NO. 6-RO-33
THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IN CASE NO. 6-RO-33 CONSISTS OF OCCUPATIONAL
HEALTH NURSES. THE RECORD REVEALS THAT PRIOR TO THE PANAMA CANAL ACT,
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES WERE ASSIGNED TO THE INDIVIDUAL BUREAUS WHERE
THEY SERVED. THERE WERE ALSO NURSES IN THE EMPLOY OF THE PANAMA CANAL
COMPANY WHO WERE ASSIGNED TO SEVERAL HOSPITALS IN THE CANAL ZONE AREA.
WITH THE PANAMA CANAL ACT, THE HOSPITALS (AND NURSES ASSIGNED THERETO)
WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. THE REMAINING
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES WERE CONSOLIDATED INTO THE INDUSTRIAL HEALTH
DIVISION OF THE OFFICE OF HEALTH AND SAFETY (A STAFF UNIT REPORTING TO
THE ADMINISTRATOR). THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY SIX NURSES ASSIGNED TO THIS
DIVISION. THEIR DUTY STATIONS ARE THE PRINCIPAL WORKSITES OF THE
COMMISSION. USUALLY ONLY ONE NURSE (AND AT MOST TWO) IS ASSIGNED PER
DUTY STATION. THE NURSES WORK WITH MINIMAL ON-SITE SUPERVISION. THEIR
SUPERVISOR MAY SEE THEM AS FREQUENTLY AS THREE OR FOUR TIMES PER WEEK OR
AS RARELY AS ONCE A MONTH. THERE ARE MONTHLY MEETINGS HELD WHICH,
DEPENDING ON THEIR NATURE, MAY INCLUDE PERSONNEL OTHER THAN NURSES.
DEPENDING ON THEIR WORKSITES, CONTACTS AMONG NURSES VARY-- THE NURSES ON
THE ATLANTIC SIDE OF THE CANAL MAY SEE THEIR COUNTERPARTS ON THE PACIFIC
SIDE NO MORE THAN ONCE A MONTH. THE NURSES DO, AT TIMES, RELY ON THE
POLICE AND FIRE FIGHTERS, WHO HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED AS EMERGENCY MEDICAL
TECHNICIANS, FOR BACKUP.
NURSES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR AIDING EMPLOYEES WHO ARE INJURED OR BECOME
ILL ON THE JOB. THEY ARE ALSO INVOLVED IN HEALTH EDUCATION. NURSES
MUST BE GRADUATES OF CERTIFIED SCHOOLS OF NURSING AND BE LICENSED. THEY
ARE PAID UNDER THE NONMANUAL SYSTEM. THEIR HOURS OF WORK COINCIDE WITH
THE HOURS OF EMPLOYEES AT THE WORKSITE. WHILE THEIR HOURS ARE SET BY
THE INDUSTRIAL HEALTH DIVISION, THIS IS COORDINATED WITH THE DIVISION
SITUATED WHERE THEIR INDUSTRIAL HEALTH STATION IS LOCATED. MOST NURSES
WORK A DAY SHIFT BUT IN SOME INSTANCES (USUALLY IN RESPONSE TO NEEDS AT
A PARTICULAR WORKSITE) THEY MAY BE ASSIGNED TO WORK AROUND-THE-CLOCK
SHIFTS.
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT PROPOSED IN CASE NO. 6-RO-33
CONSISTING OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES IS NOT APPROPRIATE. IN THIS
REGARD THE AUTHORITY NOTES THAT THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES ARE
DISPERSED GEOGRAPHICALLY AND INTERMINGLED WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION. THEIR CONTACTS WITH EACH OTHER AND THEIR SUPERVISOR ARE
RELATIVELY INFREQUENT. RATHER, THEIR WORK CONTACTS ARE MORE FREQUENT
WITH COMMISSION EMPLOYEES (OTHER THAN NURSES) WHO ARE MORE CLOSELY
SITUATED TO THEIR PARTICULAR WORKSITES. SIMILARLY, THERE IS A GREATER
DEGREE OF COMMONALITY IN THE AREA OF SOME WORKING CONDITIONS (SUCH AS
HOURS OF WORK) WITH OTHER COMMISSION EMPLOYEES THAN WITH OTHER NURSES.
ALTHOUGH THEY ARE CURRENTLY ASSIGNED TO THE SAME DIVISION, THE RECORD
INDICATES THAT, HISTORICALLY, THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES HAVE HAD A
GREATER ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTITY WITH EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO THE VARIOUS
OPERATING BUREAUS RATHER THAN WITH OTHER NURSES. MOREOVER, THEY ARE
SUBJECT TO THE SAME PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES AS OTHER COMMISSION
EMPLOYEES. THUS THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSES
DO NOT SHARE A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST WHICH IS SUFFICIENTLY SEPARATE AND
DISTINCT FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION TO JUSTIFY PLACEMENT IN
A SEPARATE UNIT. FURTHER, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT A UNIT CONSISTING OF
A GROUP SO SMALL AND GEOGRAPHICALLY DISPERSED WOULD NOT PROMOTE
EFFECTIVE DEALINGS OR EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS. (SEE
MID-CONTINENT MAPPING CENTER, NATIONAL MAPPING DIVISION, U.S. GEOLOGICAL
SURVEY, ROLLA, MISSOURI, 4 FLRA NO. 58(1980).)
CASE NO. 6-RO-36
THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IN CASE NO. 6-RO-36 CONSISTS OF FIRE
FIGHTERS. THE FIRE FIGHTERS ARE ASSIGNED TO THE FIRE DIVISION WHICH IS
WITHIN THE GENERAL SERVICES BUREAU. THE FIRE DIVISION IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR FIRE FIGHTER AND FIRE PROTECTION THROUGHOUT THE COMMISSION AREAS.
THE PANAMA CANAL TREATY AND ITS IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENTS CALL FOR THE
EVENTUAL TRANSFER OF FIRE PROTECTION RESOURCES TO THE REPUBLIC OF
PANAMA.
THE MISSION OF THE FIRE DIVISION INCLUDES STRUCTURAL FIRE FIGHTER,
FIGHTING BRUSH FIRES, SHIPBOARD FIRE FIGHTER IN THE CANAL WATERS,
EMERGENCY MEDICAL AMBULANCE SERVICE AND CERTAIN OTHER LIFESAVING DUTIES
AND RESCUE WORK. THE FIRE DIVISION IS DIVIDED INTO TWO DISTRICTS-- THE
ANCON DISTRICT, CONSISTING OF FIVE STATIONS, AND THE CHRISTOBAL
DISTRICT, CONSISTING OF THREE STATIONS. EACH DISTRICT IS HEADED BY AN
ASSISTANT CHIEF. FIRE HEADQUARTERS IS COMPOSED OF A CHIEF AND AN OFFICE
STAFF. THERE IS A DRILL MASTER WITH THE RANK OF CAPTAIN IN CHARGE OF
ALL TRAINING FOR THE DIVISION.
FIRE FIGHTERS WORK A 72-HOUR WEEK IN 24-HOUR SHIFTS. THEY ARE THE
ONLY EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION TO WORK SUCH SHIFTS. THEIR PAY IS
BASED ON THE PAY RATE OF FIRE FIGHTERS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. FIRE
FIGHTERS ARE REQUIRED TO LIVE IN THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THEY WORK; THEY
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR HAZARDOUS DUTY RETIREMENT, AND THEY HAVE ONE OF THE
HIGHEST RATES OF DISABLING INJURIES IN THE COMMISSION. NEW FIRE
FIGHTERS ARE GIVEN A 6-WEEK TRAINING PROGRAM AS WELL AS ON-THE-JOB
TRAINING.
ALL TOWBOATS ARE EQUIPPED TO SERVE AS FIREBOATS; HOWEVER, FIRE
FIGHTERS ARE NOT ASSIGNED TO THE TOWBOATS. IN THE EVENT OF A VESSEL
FIRE, FIRE FIGHTERS ARE PUT ON BOARD AND THEY WORK WITH THE OILERS, WHO
ARE ASSIGNED AS CREW ON THE TOWBOATS, TO OPERATE THE FIRE FIGHTER
EQUIPMENT. THE CREWS ON THE TOWBOATS ARE INSTRUCTED IN THE OPERATION OF
FIRE EQUIPMENT, BUT, WHILE TRAINED TO FIGHT FIRES ON THE TOWBOATS
THEMSELVES, ARE NOT TRAINED TO DO SO ON OTHER VESSELS. THE CREWS ALSO
ASSIST THE FIRE FIGHTERS IN FIGHTING FIRES ALONG THE CANAL BANKS.
ACCORDING TO TESTIMONY, NO OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION CAN BE
EASILY OR READILY INTERCHANGED WITH THE FIRE FIGHTERS.
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT PROPOSED IN CASE NO. 6-RO-36
CONSISTING OF FIRE FIGHTERS IS AN APPROPRIATE UNIT. (FIRE FIGHTERS MAY
ALSO BE APPROPRIATELY INCLUDED IN A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT.) IN SO
FINDING, THE AUTHORITY TAKES PARTICULAR NOTE OF THE FACT THAT FIRE
FIGHTERS, WHILE HAVING CERTAIN WORKING CONDITIONS IN COMMON WITH OTHER
COMMISSION EMPLOYEES, ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO CERTAIN WORKING CONDITIONS
WHICH ARE UNIQUE TO THEM SUCH AS A 72-HOUR WORKWEEK WITH 24-HOUR TOUR OF
DUTY. ALSO, THE AUTHORITY NOTES THAT FIRE FIGHTERS ARE NOT READILY
INTERCHANGEABLE WITH OTHER COMMISSION EMPLOYEES. IN VIEW OF THE UNIQUE
CONCERNS OF FIRE FIGHTERS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT, IN ADDITION TO
SHARING A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST WITH OTHER COMMISSION EMPLOYEES, THIS
GROUP OF EMPLOYEES HAS A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT COMMUNITY OF INTEREST.
ALSO THEIR UNIQUE CONCERNS (SUCH AS THEIR TOUR OF DUTY AND HIGH RATE OF
INJURY) LEND TO A CONCLUSION THAT SUCH A UNIT WOULD PROMOTE EFFECTIVE
DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS. IN THIS REGARD, THE
AUTHORITY FINDS THAT A UNIT WHICH IS STRUCTURED AROUND THE SPECIAL
INTERESTS OF AN OCCUPATIONAL OR CRAFT GROUPING OF EMPLOYEES CAN, IN
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF
AGENCY OPERATIONS IN THAT IT ALLOWS THE PARTIES TO RESPOND IN A MORE
MEANINGFUL MANNER TO A FUNCTIONAL GROUP OF EMPLOYEES WHO POSSESS
CHARACTERISTICS AND CONCERNS WHICH ARE LIMITED TO THAT PARTICULAR GROUP.
CASE NO. 6-RO-65
THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IN CASE NO. 6-RO-65 CONSISTS OF EMPLOYEES OF
THE POLICE DIVISION. THE POLICE DIVISION IS PART OF THE GENERAL
SERVICES BUREAU. IT HAS FOUR COMPONENTS: POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THE
BALBOA DISTRICT, THE CHRISTOBAL DISTRICT, AND A CORRECTIONAL UNIT AT
GAMBOA. THE POLICY DIVISION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A FULL RANGE OF POLICE
FUNCTIONS IN THE AREA BORDERING ON THE CANAL. ITS JURISDICTION IS
CONCURRENT WITH THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA INSOFAR AS ARREST POWERS ARE
CONCERNED.
THERE ARE ABOUT 300 EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICE DIVISION. IN ADDITION TO
THE ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL THERE ARE ADMINISTRATIVE AND CLERICAL SUPPORT
STAFF. THE POLICE ROTATE THROUGH ROUND-THE-CLOCK SHIFTS. SOME OFFICERS
ARE ON 24-HOUR CALL AND CARRY PAGERS FOR THIS PURPOSE. NEW OFFICERS
HAVE ATTENDED A POLICE TRAINING CENTER AND SOME HAVE ATTENDED THE FBI
ACADEMY AND THE SOUTHERN POLICE INSTITUTE LOCATED IN KENTUCKY.
THE PAY OF THE POLICY, SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE FIRE FIGHTERS, IS BASED
ON THE RATES PAID IN WASHINGTON, D.C., AND THEY ARE ELIGIBLE FOR
HAZARDOUS DUTY RETIREMENT. AS OTHER COMMISSION EMPLOYEES, THEY ARE
SUBJECT TO THE PANAMA CANAL PERSONNEL MANUAL; HOWEVER, THIS IS
SUPPLEMENTED BY A POLICY MANUAL WHICH SETS FORTH VARIOUS PROCEDURES AND
POLICIES APPLICABLE TO THE POLICE DIVISION.
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT POLICY AND FIRE FIGHTERS WORK TOGETHER IN
EVENT OF ACCIDENTS, EMERGENCIES AND CIVIL DISTURBANCES. IN THE PAST
SOME TRANSFER HAS OCCURRED BETWEEN THE POLICY DIVISION AND THE CANAL
PROTECTION DIVISION, WHICH IS CHARGED WITH, AMONG OTHER THINGS,
PROTECTING (GUARDING) COMMISSION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.
AS TO THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IN CASE NO. 6-RO-65, THE AUTHORITY ALSO
FINDS THAT IN ADDITION TO BEING APPROPRIATELY INCLUDED WITH OTHER
COMMISSION EMPLOYEES, THIS GROUP OF EMPLOYEES RETAINS A SUFFICIENTLY
SEPARATE IDENTITY AND SPECIAL CONCERNS TO STAND AS A UNIT IN AND OF
ITSELF. IN THIS REGARD THE AUTHORITY NOTES THAT THE POLICE ARE, LIKE
THE FIRE FIGHTERS, SUBJECT TO HAZARDOUS DUTY RETIREMENT. FURTHER, THE
AMOUNT OF TRANSFER AND INTERCHANGE OF THESE EMPLOYEES WITH OTHER GROUPS
OF COMMISSION EMPLOYEES IS LIMITED AND THEY ARE SUBJECT TO PROCEDURES
AND POLICIES IN ADDITION TO THOSE SET FORTH IN THE PANAMA CANAL
PERSONNEL MANUAL AS CONTAINED IN THE POLICY DIVISION PERSONNEL MANUAL.
IN VIEW OF THESE UNIQUE PERSONNEL POLICIES AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE
AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE POLICY DIVISION SHARE A
COMMUNITY OF INTEREST WHICH WARRANTS PLACEMENT IN A SEPARATE UNIT AS
WELL AS INCLUSION IN A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT. ALSO THE EXISTENCE OF
THEIR UNIQUE CONCERNS WOULD TEND TO PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND
EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS AS A RESULT OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH
A UNIT, AS WE NOTED WITH RESPECT TO 6-RO-36.
CASE NO. 6-RO-69
THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IN CASE NO. 6-RO-69 CONSISTS OF MARINE
ENGINEERS. MARINE ENGINEERS ARE ASSIGNED TO THE DREDGING DIVISION OF
THE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION BUREAU AND TO THE MARINE BUREAU. THEY
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING THE ACTUAL OPERATIONS OF THE ENGINE ROOM
ON DREDGES, TUGBOATS AND TOWBOATS. IN THIS CAPACITY THEY DIRECT OTHER
EMPLOYEES, SUCH AS ELECTRICIANS, MECHANICS AND OILERS, WHO ACTUALLY DO
THE "HANDS ON" WORK IN THE ADJUSTMENT OF EQUIPMENT AND ACTUAL OPERATION
OF THE ENGINE ROOMS. BY REGULATION A LICENSED MARINE ENGINEER MUST BE
ON DUTY WHEN DREDGES, TOWBOATS AND TUGBOATS ARE IN OPERATION AND SUCH
OPERATIONS ARE CONDUCTED ON A 24-HOUR BASIS.
AS INDICATED, MARINE ENGINEERS ARE LICENSED. THEY MAY OBTAIN
REQUISITE TRAINING BY TWO ROUTES, EITHER BY ATTENDING A 4-YEAR PROGRAM
AT A RECOGNIZED MARITIME ACADEMY OR BY SERVING AN APPRENTICESHIP WHICH
INVOLVES 3 YEARS AS AN APPRENTICE AND ONE AS A TRAINEE. UPON COMPLETION
OF SUCH TRAINING AND STANDING AN ESTABLISHED NUMBER OF WATCHES, AN
ENGINEER IS THEN ELIGIBLE FOR LICENSING AS AN ASSISTANT ENGINEER AND,
ULTIMATELY, AS A CHIEF ENGINEER.
INTERCHANGE AND TRANSFER INVOLVING ENGINEERS IS APPARENTLY LIMITED TO
MARINE ENGINEER POSITIONS LOCATED IN THE MARINE BUREAU AND THE
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION BUREAU. MARINE ENGINEERS ARE SUBJECT TO
THE PANAMA CANAL PERSONNEL MANUAL. THEIR PAY BASE IS DEVELOPED FROM AN
AVERAGE OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS WAGE AREAS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE U.S.
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT A GROUPING CONSISTING OF MARINE ENGINEERS
AND TRAINEES FOR THOSE POSITIONS IS, IN ADDITION TO BEING APPROPRIATE
FOR INCLUSION IN A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT, APPROPRIATE FOR RECOGNITION AS
A SEPARATE UNIT. AGAIN, WHILE MARINE ENGINEERS ENJOY A COMMONALITY WITH
OTHER COMMISSION EMPLOYEES, THEY ALSO ENJOY SOME FEATURES WHICH ARE
UNIQUE UNTO THEMSELVES. IN THIS REGARD THE RECORD INDICATES THAT
TRANSFER AND INTERCHANGE INVOLVING THIS GROUP IS LIMITED TO MARINE
ENGINEERS. MARINE ENGINEERS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE SKILLS AND TRAINING
UNIQUE TO THEIR PROFESSION. THE AUTHORITY NOTES THE FACT THAT MARINE
ENGINEERS IN BOTH THE PRIVATE AND FEDERAL SECTORS, HISTORICALLY, HAVE
BEEN REPRESENTED IN UNITS LIMITED TO MARINE ENGINEERS. WHILE THE UNITS
WHICH EXISTED UNDER THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY WERE LIMITED IN PURPOSE,
THE AUTHORITY VIEWS THEIR EXISTENCE AS INDICATION THAT SUCH UNITS HAVE,
IN FACT, BEEN FUNCTIONAL WITHIN AN ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT WHICH IS
SIMILAR TO THE COMMISSION. IN VIEW OF THIS HISTORICAL TREATMENT OF
MARINE ENGINEERS AND IN VIEW OF THEIR ABOVE-MENTIONED UNIQUE
CHARACTERISTICS, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT THEY HAVE AN IDENTIFIABLE
COMMUNITY OF INTEREST AND THAT SUCH A UNIT WOULD PROMOTE EFFECTIVE
DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS. IN THIS LATTER REGARD THE
AUTHORITY HAS WEIGHED THE MERITS OF A MORE COMPREHENSIVE UNIT STRUCTURE
REFLECTING THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFIGURATION OF THE AGENCY AGAINST THE
MERITS OF A UNIT WHICH IS STRUCTURED AROUND THE SPECIAL OR UNIQUE
INTERESTS OF AN OCCUPATIONAL OR CRAFT GROUPING OF EMPLOYEES AND HAS
CONCLUDED THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES BOTH ELEMENTS LEND TO EFFECTIVE
DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS. THUS WHILE THE FORMER
STRUCTURE MAY ALLOW AN ACTIVITY AND UNION TO OPERATE IN A BROADER AND
MORE CENTRALIZED FASHION, THE LATTER STRUCTURE ALLOWS THEM TO RESPOND IN
A MORE MEANINGFUL MANNER TO A FUNCTIONAL GROUP OF EMPLOYEES WHO POSSESS
CHARACTERISTICS AND CONCERNS WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARILY COMMON TO OTHERS.
THE AUTHORITY HAS TAKEN OFFICIAL NOTICE OF THE EXISTENCE, IN BOTH THE
FEDERAL AND PRIVATE SECTORS, OF CASES IN WHICH CERTAIN LICENSED MARINE
ENGINEERS HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE SUPERVISORS AND HAVE BEEN PLACED IN
UNITS CONSISTING SOLELY OF SUPERVISORS. /5/
THE AUTHORITY NOTES THAT THE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF THE PETITIONS FILED
IN CASE NOS. 6-RO-39, 6-RO-55 AND 6-RO-69 WOULD BE TO INCLUDE
SUPERVISORY MARINE ENGINEERS IN UNITS WITH NON-SUPERVISORS.
SPECIFICALLY, WHILE THE PARTIES HAVE STIPULATED THAT CHIEF ENGINEERS ARE
SUPERVISORS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE FEDERAL
SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE, THEY HAVE, VIA THE SAME
STIPULATION, INDICATED THAT ASSISTANT ENGINEERS, ENGINEER TRAINEES AND
APPRENTICES ARE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE SUPERVISORS. THUS, THE AUTHORITY
CONSIDERS THE THREE PETITIONS AS SEEKING TO INCLUDE SUPERVISORS AND
NON-SUPERVISORS IN THE SAME UNITS. IN THE AUTHORITY'S VIEW THE QUESTION
OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH THIS IS PERMISSIBLE IS GOVERNED BY SECTION
1271(A)(2) OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT (SEE NOTE 3, SUPRA). THE AUTHORITY
FINDS THAT THAT PORTION OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT PERMITS THE INCLUSION OF
SUPERVISORS IN UNITS OF RECOGNITION IN INSTANCES WHERE SUCH POSITION (OR
TYPE OF POSITION) WAS, PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1979, INCLUDED IN A UNIT OF
RECOGNITION WHICH EXISTED WITHIN THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY AND WHERE THE
LABOR ORGANIZATION HOLDING SUCH RECOGNITION ALSO REPRESENTED
NON-SUPERVISORS. IN ARRIVING AT THIS CONCLUSION THE AUTHORITY IS
MINDFUL OF A STATEMENT MADE DURING DISCUSSION ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING A PROVISION IN H.R. 111 WHICH WAS IDENTICAL
TO THAT WHICH APPEARS AS SECTION 1271(A)(2) OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT.
DURING THE EXCHANGE, REPRESENTATIVE SCHROEDER STATED AS FOLLOWS:
MY INTEREST IS IN ASSURING THAT THE PRESENT, STABLE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
RELATIONS IN PANAMA
ARE NOT DISTURBED. TO THAT END, THE COMMITTEE ADDED LANGUAGE TO MAKE
IT CLEAR THAT CURRENT
BARGAINING UNITS EVEN IF MADE UP, IN WHOLE OR PART, OF SUPERVISORS
WILL NOT BE
DISTURBED. (125 CONG.REC. H3519 (DAILY ED. MAY 21, 1979).)
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1979, MARINE ENGINEERS
WERE REPRESENTED IN THREE UNITS. TWO UNITS CONSISTED OF "MARINE
ENGINEERS COMPENSATED ON THE FLOATING EQUIPMENT GROUP WAGE SCHEDULE"
AND
THE THIRD CONSISTED OF APPRENTICE ENGINEERS. ALL THESE UNITS WERE
REPRESENTED BY MEBA. BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD (INCLUDING THE
PARTIES' STIPULATION AS TO SUPERVISORY STATUS) IT APPEARS THAT THE FIRST
TWO UNITS WERE "MIXED" UNITS (CONSISTING OF SUPERVISORS AND
NON-SUPERVISORS) AND THE THIRD WAS A NON-SUPERVISORY UNIT. THEREFORE,
THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT THOSE SUPERVISORY MARINE ENGINEERS WHOSE
POSITIONS OR TYPES OF POSITIONS WERE INCLUDED IN ANY OF THOSE UNITS ARE
ELIGIBLE FOR INCLUSION IN UNITS WITH NON-SUPERVISORS AT THIS POINT IN
TIME.
CASE NOS. 6-RO-34 AND 6-RO-66
IN VIEW OF THE AUTHORITY'S FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE
APPROPRIATENESS OF A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT, AND THE PETITIONERS' STATED
POSITIONS THAT THE PETITIONED FOR UNITS ARE SOUGHT ONLY AS AN
ALTERNATIVE TO A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT, THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO FINDINGS
WITH RESPECT TO THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE UNITS DESCRIBED IN CASE NOS.
6-RO-34 AND 6-RO-66.
ELIGIBILITY QUESTIONS
THE PARTIES STIPULATED ON THE RECORD AND THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT
CERTAIN GROUPS OF EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM ANY UNIT(S) FOUND
APPROPRIATE. THEY ARE: THE CREW OF THE S.S. CHRISTOBAL, COMMISSION
EMPLOYEES WHOSE POST OF DUTY IS NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, AND THE MEMBERS
OF THE PANAMA CANAL AREA PERSONNEL BOARD. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT CANAL
PILOTS ARE REPRESENTED IN AN EXISTING UNIT OF RECOGNITION. (A
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE WAS ISSUED ON MARCH 25, 1980, TO THE
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS FOR A UNIT OF
ALL PANAMA CANAL PILOTS.)
SEVERAL QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE STATUS AND ELIGIBILITY OF VARIOUS
CATEGORIES AND CLASSIFICATIONS WERE LITIGATED. /6/ SPECIFICALLY, IN
TERMS OF CLASSIFICATIONS, THE PARTIES WERE IN DISPUTE AS TO WHETHER THE
FOLLOWING WERE MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION
7103(A)(11) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE
/7/ AND THUS EXCLUDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 7112(B) OF THAT
STATUTE: /8/ BUDGET OFFICER (NM-12), MARINE BUREAU; VESSEL MANAGER
(FE-17), MARINE BUREAU; PORT ENGINEER (FE-17), MARINE BUREAU; MARINE
MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT, CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING BUREAU; AND
THE CHIEF, PURCHASING AND CONTRACTS BRANCH, GENERAL SERVICES BUREAU.
THE RECORD WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED WITH RESPECT TO THESE POSITIONS DOES
NOT CONTAIN SUFFICIENT FACTS REGARDING THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE
INCUMBENTS' ROLES AND/OR INFLUENCE WITH RESPECT TO THE FORMULATION AND
DETERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION'S POLICIES FOR THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A
DETERMINATION AS TO THEIR STATUS. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT
THESE POSITIONS INVOLVE ONLY ABOUT SEVEN INCUMBENTS, THE AUTHORITY VIEWS
RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUES AT THIS POINT AS NOT ESSENTIAL TO THE LIKELY
CONCLUSION OF THE ELECTIVE PROCESS. IT IS NOTED THAT THE AUTHORITY'S
ELECTION PROCESS ALLOWS A CHALLENGE TO ANY BALLOT CAST. (SEE SECTION
2422.18 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.) /9/ FURTHER, ANY
QUESTION REMAINING AFTER CERTIFICATION OF ANY UNIT MAY BE RESOLVED BY
THE PARTIES THROUGH THE FILING OF A CLARIFICATION OF UNIT PETITION.
(SEE SECTION 2422.1(D) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.) /10/
THE PARTIES RAISED QUESTIONS AS TO THE STATUS OF THE FOLLOWING
CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT TO INCLUSION IN THE UNIT:
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES, WAE'S (WHEN ACTUALLY EMPLOYED)-- PERMANENT AND
TEMPORARY, STUDENT ASSISTANTS, LOAN LABOR AND REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS.
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES AND STUDENT ASSISTANTS
THE RECORD REVEALS THAT THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 200 TO 400 TEMPORARY
EMPLOYEES ON THE ROLES OF THE COMMISSION AT ANY ONE TIME. AT THE
HEARING THE PARTIES EXPRESSED A POSITION THAT THOSE TEMPORARIES SERVING
ON APPOINTMENTS OF SHORT DURATION (90 DAYS OR 700 HOURS OR LESS) SHOULD
BE EXCLUDED. IN VIEW OF THE APPARENT UNANIMITY OF THIS VIEW, THE
AUTHORITY ACCEPTS THE POSITION OF THE PARTIES AND FINDS THAT SUCH
TEMPORARIES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED. SIMILARLY, THE RECORD REVEALS THAT THE
PARTIES INVOLVED DESIRED THAT STUDENT ASSISTANTS BE EXCLUDED FROM ANY
UNITS AND THE AUTHORITY CONCURS.
LOAN LABOR
WITH RESPECT TO LOAN LABOR, THE RECORD INDICATES THAT SUCH LOANS
OCCUR BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA. THOSE
EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ON LOAN FROM THE COMMISSION TO PANAMA ARE TREATED AS
PERMANENT EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE PERSONNEL
POLICIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES OF THE COMMISSION. ACCORDINGLY,
THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT SUCH INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE TECHNICALLY EMPLOYEES
OF THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN RELEVANT UNITS.
REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS ARE FORMER EMPLOYEES
USUALLY HIRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING A GIVEN JOB OR TRAINING
SOMEONE FOR A PARTICULAR JOB. HOWEVER, THE RECORD IS UNCLEAR AS TO
WHETHER THEY SERVE ON APPOINTMENTS OF SPECIFIC DURATION (I.E.,
APPOINTMENTS WITH A "NOT-TO-EXCEED" TIME LIMITATION). RATHER THE RECORD
INDICATES THAT THEY ARE APPOINTED FOR PERIODS OF TIME, RANGING FROM
THREE MONTHS TO ONE YEAR. INASMUCH AS IT APPEARS THAT SOME REEMPLOYED
ANNUITANTS MAY SERVE FOR SUBSTANTIAL PERIODS OF TIME WITHOUT A FIXED
DATE OF TERMINATION, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THEY SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN
THE UNIT.
WHEN ACTUALLY EMPLOYED (WAE'S)
WAE'S WORK WITHOUT A FIXED SCHEDULE FROM DAY-TO-DAY AND ARE PAID ONLY
FOR HOURS WORKED. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT MOST SERVE ON TEMPORARY
APPOINTMENTS; HOWEVER, SOME ARE ON PERMANENT APPOINTMENTS. WHILE THERE
ARE SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WAE'S AND FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, THE
AUTHORITY DOES NOT FIND THAT THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THESE ARE
SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT DIFFERENT TREATMENT. THUS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS
THAT FULL-TIME WAE'S SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE UNIT AND THOSE WAE'S WHO
ARE SERVING ON APPOINTMENTS OF 90 DAYS OR LESS SHOULD BE EXCLUDED.
AT THE HEARING AND IN THEIR POST-HEARING BRIEF THE COMMISSION
QUESTIONED WHETHER SUPERVISORS COULD BE INCLUDED IN ANY UNITS FOUND
APPROPRIATE. BASED ON THE REASONING STATED WITH RESPECT TO INCLUSION OF
MARINE ENGINEERS WHO ARE SUPERVISORS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THOSE
SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITIONS (OR TYPES OF POSITIONS) WERE INCLUDED IN
UNITS OF RECOGNITION PRIOR TO OCTOBER 1, 1979, WHERE THE LABOR
ORGANIZATION HOLDING SUCH RECOGNITION ALSO REPRESENTED NON-SUPERVISORS,
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR INCLUSION IN ANY OF THE UNITS FOUND APPROPRIATE. AS
THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH WHICH POSITIONS FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY,
THE PARTIES MAY UTILIZE THE CHALLENGED BALLOT PROCEDURES IN THE EVENT OF
ANY DISPUTES WHICH ARE OUTSTANDING AT THE TIME OF THE ELECTION. SHOULD
ANY DISPUTES EXIST AFTER COMPLETION OF THE ELECTION PROCESS, THE PARTIES
HAVE ACCESS TO CLARIFICATION OF UNIT PROCEDURES TO SEEK RESOLUTION OF
SUCH QUESTIONS.
LASTLY, AT THE HEARING A QUESTION WAS RAISED AS TO WHETHER MARINE
ENGINEERS ARE PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION
7103(A)(15) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE.
/11/ THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT, WHILE MARINE ENGINEERS ARE SUBJECT TO
SPECIFIC LICENSING REQUIREMENTS, THEY ARE NOT PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES
WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(15). SPECIFICALLY, THE AUTHORITY
NOTES THAT, WHILE MARINE ENGINEERS MAY OBTAIN REQUISITE TRAINING BY
ATTENDING A 4-YEAR PROGRAM AT A MARITIME ACADEMY, THEY MAY ALSO FULFILL
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS BY MEANS OF SERVING AN APPRENTICESHIP.
ACCORDINGLY, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT MARINE ENGINEERS DO NOT SATISFY
THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED FOR QUALIFICATION AS A PROFESSIONAL WITHIN THE
PARTICULAR MEANING OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
STATUTE.
VOTING GROUPS
BASED ON THE FOREGOING, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE FOLLOWING
DESCRIBED UNITS (SET FORTH BELOW AS VOTING GROUPS) CONSIST OF EMPLOYEES
WHO SHARE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF INTEREST, SEPARATE AND
DISTINCT FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES, AND THAT SUCH UNITS WILL PROMOTE
EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS AND ARE
APPROPRIATE FOR THE PURPOSES OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER THE FEDERAL
SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE AND THE PANAMA CANAL ACT OF
1979.
VOTING GROUP (A): ALL PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION FIRE DIVISION FIRE
FIGHTERS, DRIVER-OPERATORS, SERGEANTS, LIEUTENANTS, AND CAPTAINS
INCLUDING REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS AND LOAN LABOR WHO ARE EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION, EXCLUDING ALL FIRE DIVISION FIRE CHIEFS; ASSISTANT CHIEFS;
CLERICAL STAFF; PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES; MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS;
SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION) WAS NOT, BEFORE OCTOBER
1, 1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY BY A LABOR
ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT SUPERVISORS;
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS;
STUDENT ASSISTANTS; WAE'S SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90
DAYS; AND EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C. 7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND
(7).
VOTING GROUP (B): ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL POLICE DIVISION
INCLUDING REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS AND LOAN LABOR WHO ARE EMPLOYEES OF THE
COMMISSION, EXCLUDING ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES; MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS;
SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION) WAS NOT, BEFORE
OCTOBER 1, 1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY BY A LABOR
ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT SUPERVISORS;
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS;
STUDENT ASSISTANTS; WAE'S SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90
DAYS; AND EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C. 7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND
(7).
VOTING GROUP (C): ALL LICENSED MARINE ENGINEERS AS DEFINED IN 35
CFR, PART 119, AND THOSE IN AN APPROVED TRAINING PROGRAM LEADING TO SUCH
LICENSING, INCLUDING REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS AND LOAN LABOR WHO ARE
EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION, EXCLUDING ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES;
MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS; SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION)
WAS NOT, BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL
COMPANY BY A LABOR ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT
SUPERVISORS; TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF NOT-TO-EXCEED
90 DAYS; STUDENT ASSISTANTS; WAE'S SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF
NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS; AND EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C. 7112(B)(2),
(3), (4), (6) AND (7).
VOTING GROUP (D): ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL
COMMISSION INCLUDING REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS AND LOAN LABOR WHO ARE
EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION, EXCLUDING NONPROFESSIONALS; MANAGEMENT
OFFICIALS; SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION) WAS NOT,
BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY BY A
LABOR ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT SUPERVISORS;
CANAL PILOTS; EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO THE S.S. CHRISTOBAL; EMPLOYEES
WHOSE POST OF DUTY IS NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA; MEMBERS OF THE PANAMA
CANAL AREA PERSONNEL BOARD; TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF
NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS; STUDENT ASSISTANTS; WAE'S SERVING APPOINTMENTS
OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS; AND EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C.
7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND (7).
VOTING GROUP (E): ALL NONPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL
COMMISSION INCLUDING REEMPLOYED ANNUITANTS AND LOAN LABOR WHO ARE
EMPLOYEES OF THE COMMISSION, EXCLUDING ALL EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUPS
(A), (B) AND (C); ALL PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES; MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS;
SUPERVISORS WHOSE POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION) WAS NOT, BEFORE OCTOBER
1, 1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY BY A LABOR
ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT SUPERVISORS; CANAL
PILOTS; EMPLOYEES ASSIGNED TO THE S.S. CHRISTOBAL; EMPLOYEES WHOSE
POST OF DUTY IS NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA; MEMBERS OF THE PANAMA CANAL
AREA PERSONNEL BOARD; TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES SERVING APPOINTMENTS OF
NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS; STUDENT ASSISTANTS; WAE'S SERVING APPOINTMENTS
OF NOT-TO-EXCEED 90 DAYS; AND EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED IN 5 U.S.C.
7112(B)(2), (3), (4), (6) AND (7).
THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (A) WILL BE ASKED IF THEY WISH TO BE
REPRESENTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION BY AFGE, AFSCME L.
900, IAFF, M/MTC OR NONE. /12/ (AFGE, AFSCME AND M/MTC ALL QUALIFY AS
INTERVENORS BASED ON THEIR STATUS AS PETITIONERS OR INTERVENORS IN THE
COMMISSION-WIDE UNITS DESCRIBED IN VOTING GROUPS (D) AND (E).) IF A
MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST IN THIS VOTING GROUP IS CAST FOR IAFF, THE LABOR
ORGANIZATION SEEKING TO REPRESENT THIS GROUP IN A SEPARATE UNIT,
EMPLOYEES WILL BE TAKEN TO HAVE INDICATED THEIR DESIRE TO BE REPRESENTED
BY THAT ORGANIZATION IN A SEPARATE UNIT AND AN APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATION
WILL BE ISSUED. IF A MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST IS NOT CAST FOR IAFF, THE
BALLOTS OF EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (A) WILL BE POOLED WITH THOSE IN
VOTING GROUP (E).
THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (B) WILL BE ASKED IF THEY WISH TO BE
REPRESENTED FOR PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION BY AFGE L. 14, AFSCME
L. 900, M/MTC OR NONE. (AFSCME AND M/MTC QUALIFY AS INTERVENORS BASED
ON THEIR STATUS AS PETITIONER OR INTERVENOR IN THE COMMISSION-WIDE UNITS
DESCRIBED IN VOTING GROUPS (D) AND (E).) IF A MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST IN
THIS VOTING GROUP IS CAST FOR AFGE L. 14, THE LABOR ORGANIZATION SEEKING
TO REPRESENT THIS GROUP IN A SEPARATE UNIT, EMPLOYEES WILL BE TAKEN TO
HAVE INDICATED THEIR DESIRE TO BE REPRESENTED BY THAT ORGANIZATION IN A
SEPARATE UNIT AND AN APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATION WILL BE ISSUED. IF A
MAJORITY OF VOTES IS NOT CAST FOR AFGE L. 14, THE BALLOTS OF EMPLOYEES
IN VOTING GROUP(B) WILL BE POOLED WITH THOSE IN VOTING GROUP (E).
THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (C) WILL BE ASKED IF THEY WISH TO BE
REPRESENTED FOR PURPOSES OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION BY AFGE, AFSCME L.
900, M/MTC, MEBA OR NONE. (AFGE, AFSCME L. 900 AND M/MTC QUALIFY AS
INTERVENORS BASED ON THEIR STATUS AS PETITIONER OR INTERVENORS IN THE
COMMISSION-WIDE UNITS DESCRIBED IN VOTING GROUPS (D) AND (E).) IF A
MAJORITY OF VOTES CAST IN THIS VOTING GROUP IS CAST FOR MEBA, THE LABOR
ORGANIZATION SEEKING TO REPRESENT THIS GROUP IN A SEPARATE UNIT,
EMPLOYEES WILL BE TAKEN TO HAVE INDICATED THEIR DESIRE TO BE REPRESENTED
BY THAT ORGANIZATION IN A SEPARATE UNIT AND AN APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATION
WILL BE ISSUED. IF A MAJORITY OF VOTES IS NOT CAST FOR MEBA, THE
BALLOTS OF EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (C) WILL BE POOLED WITH THOSE IN
VOTING GROUP (E).
THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (D) WILL BE ASKED TWO QUESTIONS ON
THEIR BALLOTS: (1) WHETHER OR NOT THEY WISH TO BE INCLUDED WITH
NONPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION; AND
(2) WHETHER THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE
RECOGNITION BY AFGE, AFSCME L. 900, M/MTC OR NONE. (THE AUTHORITY FINDS
THE PETITION FILED BY M/MTC IN CASE NO. 6-RO-55 TO BE A VALID ONE AND,
HENCE, THAT ORGANIZATION IS VIEWED AS THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE
COMMISSION-WIDE UNITS HEREIN FOUND APPROPRIATE. ALTHOUGH A SIMILAR
PETITION FILED BY AFSCME L. 900 IN CASE NO. 6-RO-39 WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY
AN ADEQUATE SHOWING OF INTEREST AND MUST BE DISMISSED, AFSCME L. 900
QUALIFIES AS AN INTERVENOR IN THE PETITION FILED IN CASE NO. 6-RO-55 BY
VIRTUE OF THE SHOWING OF INTEREST SUBMITTED AS WELL AS BY VIRTUE OF ITS
STANDING AS HAVING HELD RECOGNITION FOR VARIOUS EMPLOYEES THROUGHOUT THE
PANAMA CANAL COMPANY. AFGE QUALIFIES AS AN INTERVENOR IN THE PETITION
FOR A COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT BY VIRTUE OF ITS STATUS AS HAVING HELD
RECOGNITION FOR VARIOUS EMPLOYEES OF THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY.) IN THE
EVENT THAT A MAJORITY OF VALID VOTES ARE CAST IN FAVOR OF INCLUSION WITH
THE NONPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES, THE BALLOTS OF VOTING GROUP (D) WILL BE
COMBINED WITH THOSE OF VOTING GROUP (E). HOWEVER, IN THE EVENT THAT A
MAJORITY OF VALID VOTES IS NOT CAST IN FAVOR OF INCLUSION WITH THE
NONPROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES, EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (D) WILL BE TAKEN
TO HAVE INDICATED THEIR DESIRE TO BE REPRESENTED IN A SEPARATE UNIT AND
AN APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATION WILL BE ISSUED.
THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (E) WILL BE ASKED WHETHER THEY WISH TO
BE REPRESENTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION BY AFGE, AFSCME
L. 900, M/MTC OR NONE.
IN THE EVENT THAT THE BALLOTS OF VOTING GROUPS (A), (B), (C), OR (D)
ARE POOLED WITH THE BALLOTS OF VOTING GROUP (E), THEY ARE TO BE TALLIED
IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. THOSE BALLOTS CAST IN VOTING GROUPS (A) AND
(C) FOR IAFF AND MEBA, RESPECTIVELY, SHALL BE COUNTED AS PART OF THE
TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID VOTES CAST, BUT NEITHER FOR NOR AGAINST ANY OF THE
LABOR ORGANIZATIONS SEEKING TO REPRESENT THE COMMISSION-WIDE UNIT. ALL
OTHER VOTES ARE TO BE ACCORDED THEIR FACE VALUES. THE AUTHORITY FINDS
THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, ANY UNIT RESULTING FROM A POOLING OF
VOTES AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, CONSTITUTES AN APPROPRIATE UNIT FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION AND AN APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATION IS TO
BE ISSUED.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE PETITIONS IN CASE NOS. 6-RO-33,
6-RO-34, 6-RO-39, AND 6-RO-66 BE, AND THEY HEREBY ARE, DISMISSED.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
AN ELECTION BY SECRET BALLOT SHALL BE CONDUCTED AMONG THE EMPLOYEES
IN THE UNITS FOUND TO BE APPROPRIATE AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LATER
THAN 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE BELOW. THE APPROPRIATE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
SHALL CONDUCT THE ELECTION, SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND
REGULATIONS. ELIGIBLE TO VOTE ARE THOSE IN THE UNIT WHO WERE EMPLOYED
DURING THE PAYROLL PERIOD IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE DATE BELOW,
INCLUDING EMPLOYEES WHO DID NOT WORK DURING THE PERIOD BECAUSE THEY WERE
OUT ILL, OR ON VACATION, OR ON FURLOUGH, INCLUDING THOSE IN THE MILITARY
SERVICE, WHO APPEAR AT THE POLLS. INELIGIBLE TO VOTE ARE EMPLOYEES WHO
QUIT OR WERE DISCHARGED FOR CAUSE SINCE THE DESIGNATED PAYROLL PERIOD
AND HAVE NOT BEEN REHIRED OR REINSTATED BEFORE THE ELECTION DATE.
THOSE ELIGIBLE TO VOTE IN VOTING GROUPS (A), (B), (C), (D), AND (E)
SHALL VOTE WHETHER THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION BY AFSCME L. 900, M/MTC OR NONE. IN ADDITION TO
THOSE OPTIONS, THE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUPS (A), (C), (D), AND (E)
SHALL VOTE WHETHER THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED BY AFGE. SIMILARLY,
THOSE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING GROUP (A) SHALL ALSO VOTE WHETHER THEY WISH TO
BE REPRESENTED BY IAFF AND THOSE IN VOTING GROUP (C) SHALL ALSO VOTE
WHETHER THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED BY MEBA. THOSE EMPLOYEES IN VOTING
GROUP (B) SHALL VOTE WHETHER THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED BY AFGE L. 14,
AFSCME L. 900, M/MTC OR NONE.
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., FEBRUARY 12, 1981
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ THE AUTHORITY'S DECISION IN THESE CASES IS LIMITED TO THE SPECIAL
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH EXIST WITH RESPECT TO THE PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE PANAMA CANAL ACT OF 1979 (93 STAT. 456).
/2/ SEE NOTE 1, SUPRA.
/3/ SECTION 1271 OF THE PANAMA CANAL ACT PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:
SEC. 1271. (A) NOTHING IN THIS ACT SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO AFFECT THE
APPLICABILITY OF
CHAPTER 71 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, RELATING TO
LABOR-MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEE
RELATIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMISSION OR THE OPERATIONS OF ANY
OTHER EXECUTIVE AGENCY
CONDUCTED IN THAT AREA OF THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA WHICH, ON SEPTEMBER
30, 1979, WAS THE CANAL
ZONE, EXCEPT THAT IN APPLYING THOSE PROVISIONS--
(1) THE DEFINITION OF "EMPLOYEE" SHALL BE APPLIED WITHOUT REGARD TO
CLAUSE (I) OF SECTION
7103(A)(2) OF SUCH TITLE 5 WHICH RELATES TO NATIONALITY AND
CITIZENSHIP; AND
(2) A UNIT SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE APPROPRIATE NOTWITHSTANDING THE
FACT THAT IT INCLUDES
ANY SUPERVISOR IF THAT SUPERVISOR'S POSITION (OR TYPE OF POSITION)
WAS, BEFORE OCTOBER 1,
1979, REPRESENTED BEFORE THE PANAMA CANAL COMPANY BY A LABOR
ORGANIZATION THAT INCLUDED
EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT SUPERVISORS.
(B) LABOR-MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEE RELATIONS OF THE COMMISSION, OTHER
EXECUTIVE AGENCIES,
AND THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND ORGANIZATIONS
OF THOSE EMPLOYEES, IN
CONNECTION WITH OPERATIONS CONDUCTED IN THAT AREA OF THE REPUBLIC OF
PANAMA WHICH, ON
SEPTEMBER 30, 1979, WAS THE CANAL ZONE, SHALL BE GOVERNED AND
REGULATED SOLELY BY THE
APPLICABLE LAWS, RULES, AND REGULATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES.
/4/ SECTION 2429.23(B) PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:
SEC. 2429.23 EXTENSION; WAIVER
* * * *
(B) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH (D) OF THIS SECTION, THE
AUTHORITY . . . MAY WAIVE ANY
EXPIRED TIME LIMIT IN THIS SUBCHAPTER IN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES.
/5/ A SIMILAR QUESTION HAS BEEN RAISED BY MEBA IN ITS POST-HEARING
BRIEF; HOWEVER, MEBA FAILED TO RAISE THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HEARING
OFFICER. SECTION 2429.5 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATION
PROVIDES THAT:
SEC. 2429.5 MATTERS NOT PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED; OFFICIAL NOTICE.
THE AUTHORITY WILL NOT CONSIDER EVIDENCE OFFERED BY A PARTY, OR ANY
ISSUE, WHICH WAS NOT
PRESENTED IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, HEARING
OFFICER, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE, OR ARBITRATOR. THE AUTHORITY MAY, HOWEVER, TAKE OFFICIAL
NOTICE OR SUCH MATTERS AS
WOULD BE PROPER.
/6/ THE PARTIES STIPULATED THAT THE FOLLOWING CLASSIFICATIONS ARE
PROFESSIONALS WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF SECTION 7103(A)(15) OF THE
FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (SEE NOTE 7, INFRA):
NAVAL ARCHITECT, CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, MAGISTRATE, MEDICAL
OFFICER, OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSE, ENTOMOLOGIST, VETERINARY MEDICAL
OFFICER, LAW CLERK, ATTORNEY, ECONOMIST, ENVIRONMENTALIST, INDUSTRIAL
ENGINEER, ECOLOGIST, ACCOUNTANT, AUDITOR, INDUSTRIAL ENGINEER, GENERAL
ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, MECHANICAL ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL ENGINEER,
ELECTRONIC ENGINEER, CIVIL ENGINEER, GEOLOGIST, GEODESIST, HYDROLOGIST,
METEOROLOGIST, CHEMIST, AGRONOMIST, LIBRARIAN AND SANITARIAN.
/7/ SECTION 7103(A)(11) PROVIDES:
(11) 'MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL' MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYED BY AN AGENCY
IN A POSITION THE
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF WHICH REQUIRE OR AUTHORIZE THE
INDIVIDUAL TO FORMULATE,
DETERMINE, OR INFLUENCE THE POLICIES OF THE AGENCY.
/8/ SECTION 7112(B) PROVIDES:
(B) A UNIT SHALL NOT BE DETERMINED TO BE APPROPRIATE UNDER THIS
SECTION SOLELY ON THE BASIS
OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH EMPLOYEES IN THE PROPOSED UNIT HAVE ORGANIZED,
NOR SHALL A UNIT BE
DETERMINED TO BE APPROPRIATE IF IT INCLUDES--
(1) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 7135(A)(2) OF THIS TITLE, ANY
MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL OR
SUPERVISOR.
/9/ SECTION 2422.18 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS
PROVIDES:
SEC. 2422.18 CHALLENGED BALLOTS.
ANY PARTY OR THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AUTHORITY MAY CHALLENGE, FOR
GOOD CAUSE, THE
ELIGIBILITY OF ANY PERSON TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ELECTION. THE
BALLOTS OF SUCH CHALLENGED
PERSONS SHALL BE IMPOUNDED.
/10/ SECTION 2422.1(D) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS
PROVIDES:
SEC. 2422.1 WHO MAY FILE PETITIONS.
* * * *
(D) A PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OF AN EXISTING UNIT OR FOR AMENDMENT
OF RECOGNITION OR
CERTIFICATION MAY BE FILED BY AN ACTIVITY OR AGENCY OR BY A LABOR
ORGANIZATION WHICH IS
CURRENTLY RECOGNIZED BY THE ACTIVITY OR AGENCY AS AN EXCLUSIVE
REPRESENTATIVE.
/11/ SECTION 7103(A)(15) PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:
"(15) 'PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEE' MEANS--
"(A) AN EMPLOYEE ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK--
"(I) REQUIRING KNOWLEDGE OF AN ADVANCED TYPE IN A FIELD OF SCIENCE OR
LEARNING CUSTOMARILY
ACQUIRED BY A PROLONGED COURSE OF SPECIALIZED INTELLECTUAL
INSTRUCTION AND STUDY IN AN
INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING OR A HOSPITAL (AS DISTINGUISH FROM
KNOWLEDGE ACQUIRED BY A
GENERAL ACADEMIC EDUCATION, OR FROM AN APPRENTICESHIP, OR FROM
TRAINING IN THE PERFORMANCE OF
ROUTINE MENTAL, MANUAL, MECHANICAL, OR PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES);
(II) REQUIRING THE CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF DISCRETION AND JUDGMENT IN
ITS PERFORMANCE;
"(III) WHICH IS PREDOMINANTLY INTELLECTUAL AND VARIED IN CHARACTER
(AS DISTINGUISHED FROM
ROUTINE MENTAL, MANUAL, MECHANICAL, OR PHYSICAL WORK); AND
"(IV) WHICH IS OF SUCH CHARACTER THAT THE OUTPUT PRODUCED, OR THE
RESULT ACCOMPLISHED BY
SUCH WORK CANNOT BE STANDARDIZED IN RELATION TO A GIVEN PERIOD OF
TIME; OR
"(B) AN EMPLOYEE WHO HAS COMPLETED THE COURSES OF SPECIALIZED
INTELLECTUAL INSTRUCTION AND
STUDY DESCRIBED IN SUBPARAGRAPH (A)(I) OF THIS PARAGRAPH AND IS
PERFORMING RELATED WORK UNDER
APPROPRIATE DIRECTION OR GUIDANCE TO QUALIFY THE EMPLOYEE AS
PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEE DESCRIBED
IN SUBPARAGRAPH (A) OF THIS PARAGRAPH
/12/ IN CONDUCTION THE ELECTION DIRECTED HEREIN THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
SHALL ASCERTAIN HOW THE PARTIES WISH TO HAVE THEIR NAMES APPEAR ON THE
BALLOTS.