Local No. 3, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO-CLC (Labor Organization/Petitioner) and Naval Sea Support Center, Atlantic Detachment (Activity)
[ v07 p626 ]
07:0626(99)RO
The decision of the Authority follows:
7 FLRA No. 99 LOCAL NO. 3, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO-CLC Labor Organization/Petitioner and NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC DETACHMENT Activity Case No. 2-RO-41 DECISION AND ORDER ON PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION OF UNIT UPON A PETITION DULY FILED WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 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. 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 THIS CASE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS: LOCAL NO. 3, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO-CLC (UNION), FILED A PETITION SEEKING AN ELECTION IN A UNIT COMPOSED OF ALL EMPLOYEES AT THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC DETACHMENT, TRAINING SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT (TSD), WHICH IS LOCATED IN PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. THE TSD IS ONE OF SEVERAL LINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE NAVAL SEA SUPPORT CENTER, ATLANTIC DETACHMENT (ACTIVITY). THE ACTIVITY CONTENDS THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS INAPPROPRIATE UNDER THE STATUTE ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE TSD DO NOT SHARE A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY, AND THAT SUCH A UNIT WOULD LEAD TO UNWARRANTED FRAGMENTATION OF THE ACTIVITY AND WOULD NOT PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS AND EFFICIENCY OF OPERATIONS. THE ACTIVITY ARGUES THAT THE ONLY APPROPRIATE UNIT WOULD BE ACTIVITY-WIDE. /1/ THE UNION'S POSITION THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT IS APPROPRIATE IS BASED ON ITS GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, UNIQUENESS OF FUNCTION AND THE POSITION DESCRIPTIONS OF THE TSD'S EMPLOYEES. THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT WHICH THE PETITIONER SEEKS TO REPRESENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION 7112(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE. /2/ THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THE EMPLOYEES SOUGHT TO BE INCLUDED DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE EMPLOYEES IN THE OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS. THUS, EMPLOYEES WHO WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED UNIT SHARE WITH OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY MANY OF THE SAME JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES. FURTHER, THERE IS EXTENSIVE INTERCHANGE. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT 30 RO 40 PERCENT OF THE WORKING TIME OF THE EMPLOYEES SOUGHT IS SPENT ON TEMPORARY DUTY ASSIGNMENTS AWAY FROM TSD AT THE OTHER LINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE ACTIVITY. LABOR RELATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY IS CENTRALIZED IN THE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT AT THE NAVAL WEAPONS STATION IN YORKTOWN, VIRGINIA; LINE DEPARTMENT HEADS HAVE LIMITED AUTHORITY IN PERSONNEL AND DISCIPLINARY MATTERS; AND ACTIVITY INSTRUCTIONS AND MAJOR PERSONNEL MATTERS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE OFFICER IN CHARGE WHO IS ALSO THE ACTIVITY'S EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY OFFICER. HENCE, THE PETITIONER HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT THE EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIT SOUGHT SHARE TERMS OR CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM OTHER ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES. THUS ANY COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SEPARATE FROM OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. THE AUTHORITY FURTHER NOTES THAT THE PROPOSED UNIT OF 42 OUT OF 421 ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES WOULD NOT PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS OR EFFICIENCY OF AGENCY OPERATIONS SINCE IT WOULD RESULT IN " . . . ARTIFICIAL FRAGMENTATION OF AN INTEGRATED ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT OR SUBDIVISION OF THE AGENCY ON THE BASIS OF GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION ALONG." U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE, MINNEAPOLIS ADP FIELD CENTER, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, 5 FLRA NO. 92(1981). FURTHER, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PRACTICES ARE CENTRALLY ESTABLISHED AND UNIFORMLY IMPLEMENTED FOR THE ENTIRE ACTIVITY. THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT PETITIONED FOR IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION 7112(A)(1), AND THE PETITION IS HEREBY DISMISSED. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE PETITION IN CASE NO. 2-RO-41 BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 15, 1982 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES: --------------- /1/ THE UNION STATED AT THE HEARING THAT IT WAS NOT PREPARED TO SAY IF IT WOULD REPRESENT AN ACTIVITY-WIDE UNIT IF SUCH WAS FOUND TO BE APPROPRIATE. /2/ SECTION 7112(A)(1) PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART: . . . THE AUTHORITY SHALL DETERMINE ANY UNIT TO BE AN APPROPRIATE UNIT ONLY IF THE DETERMINATION WILL ENSURE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF INTEREST AMONG THE EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIT AND WILL PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS WITH, AND EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATIONS OF, THE AGENCY INVOLVED.