[ v08 p764 ]
08:0764(128)CU
The decision of the Authority follows:
8 FLRA No. 128 DEFENSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY, HEADQUARTERS, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA Agency/Petitioner and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2, AFL-CIO Labor Organization Case No. 3-CU-50 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE AUTHORITY'S DECISION IN DEFENSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY, HEADQUARTERS, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA, 8 FLRA NO. 128(1982), FILED BY THE AGENCY/PETITIONER. ON MAY 26, 1982, THE AUTHORITY ISSUED ITS DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT IN THE ABOVE CASE. AMONG OTHER FINDINGS, IT FOUND, UNDER THE HEADING COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYST, NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM, DCA OPERATIONS CENTER (DCAOC), GS-334-13, THAT "FOUR COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYSTS" ARE NOT SUPERVISORS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE STATUTE. THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION POINTS OUT THAT THERE ARE IN FACT FIFTEEN COMPUTER SPECIALISTS IN DCAOC, WHOM THE AUTHORITY APPEARS TO ADDRESS, AND ASKS US TO RECONSIDER OUR CONCLUSION WITH REGARD TO THEIR SUPERVISORY STATUS. THE MOTION ALSO POINTS OUT THAT THERE ARE IN FACT FOUR COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYSTS IN DCAOC, BUT THAT THE AGENCY/PETITIONER HAD ALLEGED THAT THEY ARE MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS, NOT SUPERVISORS. HENCE, IT ASKS THE AUTHORITY TO ALSO PASS UPON THIS ALLEGATION. THE AUTHORITY SHALL HERE DETERMINE THE STATUS OF BOTH THOSE CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEES. THUS, THE AUTHORITY GRANTS THE MOTION OF THE AGENCY/PETITIONER AND ISSUES THIS SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION. COMPUTER SPECIALIST, NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM, DCA OPERATIONS CENTER (DCAOC), GS-334-13 THERE ARE FIFTEEN COMPUTER SPECIALISTS WHO SERVE AS TEAM LEADERS IN THE ADP AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (NCS). THE AGENCY/PETITIONER ALLEGED THAT THESE EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE UNIT AS SUPERVISORS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE. THE SUPERVISORY STATUS OF THESE TEAM LEADERS WAS INCORRECTLY CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE HEADING COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYST (SEE BELOW). AFTER CAREFUL REVIEW OF THE TRANSCRIPT IN THIS CASE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT ITS STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT TEAM LEADERS' ESTIMATES "ARE APPROVED BY EITHER THE BRANCH CHIEF OR DIVISION DIRECTOR, WHO CHOOSES WHICH EMPLOYEES WILL CARRY OUT THE WORK," IS A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION OF THE TESTIMONY. WHILE TEAM LEADERS MAKE SOME DECISIONS IN THIS REGARD, ESPECIALLY IN CASES OF URGENCY, IT IS NONETHELESS TRUE THAT, AS PART OF THEIR ESTIMATES AS TO HOW A TEAM ASSIGNMENT WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED, INCLUDING ASSIGNMENT OF INDIVIDUAL PERSONNEL, FINAL APPROVAL COMES FROM THE BRANCH CHIEF OR THE DIVISION DIRECTOR. THE AUTHORITY RECONFIRMS THE PREVIOUS FINDINGS AS TO THESE INDIVIDUALS. UPON RECONSIDERATION, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE ABOVE TEAM LEADERS ARE NOT SUPERVISORS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE AND THEY MUST THEREFORE BE INCLUDED IN THE BARGAINING UNIT. COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYST, NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM, DCA OPERATIONS CENTER (DCAOC), GS-334-13 THERE ARE FOUR COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYSTS IN DCAOC, WHO THE AGENCY/PETITIONER ALLEGES SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE UNIT AS MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS, WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(11) OF THE STATUTE AND WHOSE STATUS THE AUTHORITY HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY PASSED UPON. IN THE LEAD CASE OF DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING SELECTION OFFICE, 7 FLRA NO. 24(1981), THE AUTHORITY INTERPRETED THE STATUTORY DEFINITION OF "MANAGEMENT OFFICIAL" TO INCLUDE THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO: (1) CREATE, ESTABLISH OR PRESCRIBE GENERAL PRINCIPLES, PLANS, OR COURSES OF ACTION OF AN AGENCY; (2) DECIDE UPON OR SETTLE UPON GENERAL PRINCIPLES, PLANS OR COURSES OF ACTION FOR AN AGENCY; OR (3) BRING ABOUT OR OBTAIN A RESULT AS TO THE ADOPTION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES, PLANS OR COURSES OF ACTION FOR AN AGENCY. APPLYING THESE CRITERIA TO THE INSTANT CASE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE WORK OF ALL FOUR INCUMBENTS IS RELATED AND INVOLVES THE DEVELOPING, ANALYZING AND MAINTAINING OF BOTH HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE SYSTEMS SUCH AS DATA BASE CIRCULAR SYSTEMS, CONFIGURATION CONTROL, INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE BY CONTRACTS OFFICERS WHO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT, SITE PREPARATION FOR INCOMING EQUIPMENT AND LONG RANGE COST ANALYSIS OF SUCH SYSTEMS. WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT WORK PERFORMED BY THESE ANALYSTS AFFECTS THE WORK OF MANAGEMENT, THE WORK PRODUCT OF THE INCUMBENTS AND THEIR SUGGESTIONS ARE NO MORE THAN A STARTING POINT FOR THOSE MAKING FINAL DECISIONS. THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE INCUMBENTS IN THESE POSITIONS ARE NOT MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS, AS THEY DO NOT FORMULATE, DETERMINE OR INFLUENCE THE POLICIES OF THE AGENCY WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(11) OF THE STATUTE, AND THEY MUST THEREFORE BE INCLUDED IN THE BARGAINING UNIT. ORDER ACCORDINGLY, THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS HEREBY GRANTED, AND, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT TO BE CLARIFIED HEREIN, FOR WHICH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2, AFL-CIO, WAS PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED AS EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE, AND WHICH THE AUTHORITY IN THIS CASE CLARIFIED ON MAY 26, 1982, BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, FURTHER CLARIFIED TO INCLUDE THE POSITIONS OF COMPUTER SPECIALIST AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYST, NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM, DCA OPERATIONS CENTER (DCAOC), GS-334-13. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., AUGUST 5, 1982 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY