[ v07 p738 ]
07:0738(118)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
7 FLRA No. 118 UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 2750TH AIR BASE WING HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO Respondent and WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB FIRE FIGHTERS LOCAL F-88, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS, AFL-CIO Labor Organization Case No. 5-CA-376 DECISION AND ORDER THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR'S "ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY" IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2429.1(A) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2429.1(A)). UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING THE PARTIES' STIPULATION OF FACTS, ACCOMPANYING EXHIBITS AND BRIEFS SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL, AND AN AMICUS BRIEF SUBMITTED BY THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT (OPM), THE AUTHORITY FINDS: WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB FIRE FIGHTERS, LOCAL F-88, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS, AFL-CIO (THE UNION) IS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF A BARGAINING UNIT OF FIREFIGHTERS WHO ARE EMPLOYEES OF THE 2750TH AIR BASE WING HEADQUARTERS, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO (THE RESPONDENT). THE UNION IS ALSO THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF A UNIT OF NON-SUPERVISORY GENERAL SCHEDULE (GS) FIREFIGHTERS AND INSPECTORS EMPLOYED BY THE DEFENSE ELECTRONICS SUPPLY CENTER, DAYTON, OHIO (DESC). /1/ JOHN M. GIBBS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNION, AND MICHAEL E. LUDWICK, THE UNION'S CHIEF NEGOTIATOR IN CONTRACT BARGAINING WITH DESC, ARE BOTH EMPLOYEES OF THE RESPONDENT. ON OR ABOUT JANUARY 24, 1980, THE UNION REQUESTED THAT THE RESPONDENT GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO GIBBS AND LUDWICK FOR THE TIME THEY WOULD BE ENGAGED IN NEGOTIATING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE UNION WITH DESC. THE RESPONDENT DENIED THE REQUEST. THE GENERAL COUNSEL ISSUED A COMPLAINT ALLEGING THAT THE RESPONDENT VIOLATED SECTION 7116(A)(1) AND (8) OF THE STATUTE /2/ BY REFUSING TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO TWO OF ITS EMPLOYEES WHILE THEY WERE ENGAGED IN NEGOTIATING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNION AND DESC. THE ALLEGATION IS THAT THE RESPONDENT'S REFUSAL TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS CONTRARY TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7131(A) OF THE STATUTE. /3/ THE QUESTION STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES IS "WHETHER RESPONDENT IS REQUIRED BY (SECTION) 7131(A) TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO UNION NEGOTIATORS LUDWICK AND GIBBS, ITS EMPLOYEES, WHILE THEY ARE ENGAGED IN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE DEFENSE ELECTRONICS SUPPLY CENTER, DAYTON, OHIO." THE GENERAL COUNSEL CONTENDS THAT SECTION 7131(A) "CLEARLY PROVIDES OFFICIAL TIME FOR ANY EMPLOYEE AS LONG AS THE EMPLOYEE IS REPRESENTING THE UNION IN BARGAINING UNDER THE STATUTE." IN THIS REGARD, THE GENERAL COUNSEL ASSERTS THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION IN THE STATUTE OR ITS LEGISLATIVE HISTORY THAT CONGRESS INTENDED TO LIMIT THE APPLICATION OF SECTION 7131(A) ONLY TO THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE IS NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE AGENCY WHICH EMPLOYS THE REPRESENTATIVE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE RESPONDENT, AND OPM AS AMICUS, CONTEND THAT SECTION 7131(A), WHEN READ IN THE CONTEXT OF THE STATUTE AS A WHOLE, MUST BE INTERPRETED TO AUTHORIZE OFFICIAL TIME ONLY FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES REPRESENTING AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE IN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE BARGAINING UNIT FOR WHICH THE AGREEMENT IS SOUGHT. THE RESPONDENT AND OPM ASSERT THAT ADOPTION OF AN INTERPRETATION THAT DOES NOT LIMIT OFFICIAL TIME ENTITLEMENT TO EMPLOYEES IN THE BARGAINING UNIT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE STATUTE AND ITS PURPOSES. AS SET FORTH IN N. 3, SUPRA, SECTION 7131(A) OF THE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT AN EMPLOYEE REPRESENTING AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE IN THE NEGOTIATION OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT UNDER THE STATUTE BE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TIME FOR SUCH PURPOSES DURING THE TIME THE EMPLOYEE OTHERWISE WOULD BE IN A DUTY STATUS. NEITHER THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 7131(A) NOR ITS LEGISLATIVE HISTORY INDICATES THAT CONGRESS DEFINITIVELY ADDRESSED THE MATTER HERE IN ISSUE. HOWEVER, WHEN READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER RELATED PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO EFFECTUATE THE PURPOSES OF THE STATUTE, IT IS CLEAR THAT SECTION 7131(A) CANNOT BE INTERPRETED TO REQUIRE RESPONDENT IN THIS CASE TO GRANT OFFICIAL TIME TO TWO OF ITS EMPLOYEES WHILE THEY ARE ENGAGED IN COLLECTIVE BARGAINING NEGOTIATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE UNION WITH DESC. SECTION 7131(A) MUST, OF COURSE, BE CONSTRUED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL SCHEME OF THE STATUTE. THAT SCHEME DEMONSTRATES THAT CONGRESS INTENDED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNDER THE STATUTE TO OPERATE WITHIN A FRAMEWORK OF APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNITS IN WHICH EMPLOYEES, THROUGH THEIR EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE, CAN PARTICIPATE IN DECISIONS WHICH AFFECT THEM. THUS, SECTION 7103(A)(12) DEFINES "COLLECTIVE BARGAINING" AS: (T)HE PERFORMANCE OF THE MUTUAL OBLIGATION OF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF AN AGENCY AND THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF EMPLOYEES IN AN APPROPRIATE UNIT IN THE AGENCY TO MEET AT REASONABLE TIMES AND TO CONSULT AND BARGAIN IN A GOOD-FAITH EFFORT TO REACH AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT AFFECTING SUCH EMPLOYEES . . . . ADDITIONALLY, SECTION 7101 SETS FORTH CONGRESS' FINDING THAT THE STATUTORY PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT OF EMPLOYEES TO BARGAIN COLLECTIVELY AND PARTICIPATE "THROUGH LABOR ORGANIZATIONS OF THEIR OWN CHOOSING IN DECISIONS WHICH AFFECT THEM . . . FACILITATES AND ENCOURAGES THE AMICABLE SETTLEMENTS OF DISPUTES BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THEIR EMPLOYERS INVOLVING CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT(.)" FURTHER EVIDENCE OF CONGRESS' INTENT THAT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OPERATE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN APPROPRIATE BARGAINING UNIT FRAMEWORK IS FOUND IN SECTIONS 7111 /4/ AND 7112 /5/ OF THE STATUTE. MOREOVER, DECISIONS OF THE AUTHORITY HAVE HELD THAT THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT AFFECTING EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE THE BARGAINING UNIT IN AN AGENCY. /6/ IT IS APPARENT, THEREFORE, THAT THE OFFICIAL TIME PROVISION OF SECTION 7131(A) IS INTENDED TO APPLY IN THE CONTEXT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN AN APPROPRIATE UNIT IN AN AGENCY BETWEEN THE AGENCY AND EMPLOYEES REPRESENTING THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OVER CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT WHICH AFFECT EMPLOYEES IN THAT UNIT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES, CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL SCHEME OF THE STATUTE AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, THAT OFFICIAL TIME ENTITLEMENT UNDER SECTION 7131(A) ACCRUES ONLY TO AN EMPLOYEE, SERVING AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE, WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE BARGAINING UNIT TO WHICH THE RIGHT TO NEGOTIATE THE BARGAINING AGREEMENT APPLIES. /7/ THEREFORE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE RESPONDENT IN THE INSTANT CASE DID NOT VIOLATE SECTION 7116(A)(1) AND (8) OF THE STATUTE AND THAT THE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED. /8/ ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE COMPLAINT IN CASE NO. 5-CA-376 BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 22, 1982 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES: --------------- /1/ THE PARTIES STIPULATED THAT ALTHOUGH THE RESPONDENT AND DESC ARE BOTH SUBORDINATE ELEMENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, THEY ARE SEPARATE ORGANIZATIONS IN TERMS OF FUNCTION AND MISSION AND ARE NOT INTERRELATED IN ANY ORGANIZATIONAL MANNER. THE STIPULATION ALSO SHOWS THAT THEY HAVE SEPARATE "PERSONNEL MANNING, BUDGETS, MISSIONS, ORGANIZATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND CHAINS OF COMMAND." /2/ SEC. 7116. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES (A) FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER, IT SHALL BE AN UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE FOR AN AGENCY-- (1) TO INTERFERE WITH, RESTRAIN, OR COERCE ANY EMPLOYEE IN THE EXERCISE BY THE EMPLOYEE OF ANY RIGHT UNDER THIS CHAPTER; . . . . (8) TO OTHERWISE FAIL OR REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH ANY PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER. /3/ SEC. 7131. OFFICIAL TIME (A) ANY EMPLOYEE REPRESENTING AN EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE IN THE NEGOTIATION OF A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT UNDER THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL TIME FOR SUCH PURPOSES, INCLUDING ATTENDANCE AT IMPASSE PROCEEDING, DURING THE TIME THE EMPLOYEE OTHERWISE WOULD BE IN A DUTY STATUS. THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES FOR WHOM OFFICIAL TIME IS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS SUBSECTION SHALL NOT EXCEED THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS DESIGNATED AS REPRESENTING THE AGENCY FOR SUCH PURPOSES. /4/ SECTION 7111, ENTITLED "EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION OF LABOR ORGANIZATIONS," PROVIDES THAT AN AGENCY SHALL ACCORD EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION TO A LABOR ORGANIZATION IF THE ORGANIZATION HAS BEEN SELECTED AS THE REPRESENTATIVE BY A MAJORITY OF THE EMPLOYEES IN AN APPROPRIATE UNIT WHO CAST VALID BALLOTS IN A SECRET BALLOT ELECTION, AND FURTHER PROVIDES THE PROCEDURES FOR ACCORDING EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION. /5/ SECTION 7112, ENTITLED "DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE UNITS FOR LABOR ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATION," PROVIDES THE STANDARDS BY WHICH THE AUTHORITY DETERMINES THE APPROPRIATENESS OF ANY BARGAINING UNIT. /6/ SEE E.G., DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, 4 FLRA NO. 60(1980), WHERE THE AUTHORITY FOUND A PROPOSAL THAT MERIT PROMOTION PROCEDURES BE APPLIED IN FILLING POSITIONS OUTSIDE OF THE BARGAINING UNIT NEGOTIABLE ONLY AT THE ELECTION OF THE AGENCY, SINCE THE DEFINITION OF "COLLECTIVE BARGAINING" UNDER SECTION 7103(A)(12) ONLY PERTAINS TO A DUTY TO BARGAIN OVER CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT WHICH AFFECT EMPLOYEES WITHIN THE BARGAINING UNIT. /7/ FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS UNPERSUASIVE THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S ARGUMENT THAT CONGRESS, BY REJECTING LANGUAGE LIMITING OFFICIAL TIME TO NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE PARTIES, "INTENDED OFFICIAL TIME TO BE GRANTED FOR NEGOTIATIONS TO ANY INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYED IN AN EXECUTIVE AGENCY." /8/ THIS DECISION CONCERNS ONLY ENTITLEMENTS TO OFFICIAL TIME UNDER SECTION 7131(A), AND DOES NOT ADDRESS OFFICIAL TIME WHICH MAY BE NEGOTIATED UNDER SECTION 7131(D).