[ v20 p543 ]
20:0543(66)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
20 FLRA No. 66
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 29
Union
and
KANSAS CITY DISTRICT
CORPS OF ENGINEERS,
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI
Agency
Case No. 0-NG-1059
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority
pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), and raises issues
concerning the negotiability of the following Union proposal.
Section 4. Travel Entitlements.
(a). Employees may draw travel advances, including per diem,
up to 100% of anticipated cost for any travel in excess of 10
hours. If an advance cannot be granted in such cases, the
employee will not be compelled to perform the travel. Employees
shall be in a per diem status portal-to-portal, unless they elect
to go into a previously approved leave status during the tour of
duty. Miscellaneous expenditures not enumerated in the Federal
Travel Regulations (FTR) or Joint Travel Regulations (JTR), when
necessarily incurred by the traveler in the performance of the
job/work related business, shall be reimbursed when approved by
the traveler's supervisor. Itemization of subsistence expenses
are not required on the travel voucher, except where reimbursement
is based on actual subsistence expenses. Actual and necessary
subsistence expenses incurred on a travel assignment for which
reimbursement is claimed, shall be itemized to permit a review of
the amounts spent daily for lodging, meals and all other items of
subsistence expenses. Receipts shall be provided for lodging and
other expenses, in excess of $25.00, except meals. No ceiling
shall be placed on actual and necessary subsistence, except
reimbursement shall not exceed the maximum rate by FTR.
Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the
parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations.
The disputed portion of the Union's proposal concerns the amount of
monetary reimbursement that bargaining unit employees are entitled to
receive for actual out of pocket expenses when traveling on official
business for the Agency in "high cost" areas. The proposal would
provide for reimbursement to employees of all actual and necessary
expenses within a set regulatory ceiling. In its statement of position,
the Agency generally contends that the proposal is nonnegotiable since
it would preclude the imposition of any ceiling for such expenses other
than the maximum amount set by the FTRs, without regard to whether the
expenses, in their particular circumstances, are unreasonable. Under 5
U.S.C. 5701-5709, as referenced by the Agency, civilian employees of
Government agencies, including civilian employees of the Agency herein,
may be reimbursed actual and necessary expenses for travel to a high
cost area in an amount not to exceed the maximum rate prescribed by the
Administrator of General Services in the Federal Travel Regulations (GSA
Bulletin FPMR A-40, chapter 1) (FTRs). Within the maximum rate
established at FTR paragraph 1-8.6, an employee's reimbursement is
subject to the following general limitations set forth at FTR paragraph
1-1.3:
a. Employee's obligation. An employee traveling on official
business is expected to exercise the same care in incurring
expenses that a prudent person would exercise if traveling on
personal business.
b. Reimbursable expenses. Traveling expenses which will be
reimbursed are confined to those expenses essential to the
transacting of official business.
The Comptroller General has interpreted these provisions of FTR
paragraph 1-1.3 as entitling employees to reimbursement only for
reasonable expenses. 62 Comp.Gen. 88(1982) and Matter of Social
Security Administration Employees, Comp. Gen. decision B-208794 (July
20, 1983) (unpublished). Thus, under the FTRs, as interpreted by the
Comptroller General, each expenditure within the maximum rate set under
those regulations must itself be reasonable.
As applied herein, the instant proposal, which requires that no
ceiling shall be placed on actual and necessary subsistence, except that
reimbursement shall not exceed the maximum rate set by the FTRs, is
inconsistent with the FTRs' requirement that employees are only entitled
to reimbursement for reasonable expenses, notwithstanding the actual
dollar amounts established for particular high cost areas in paragraph
1-8.6 of the FTRs. Furthermore, the FTRs are promulgated by the GSA in
order to implement 5 U.S.C. 5701-5709, and are Government-wide
regulations within the meaning of section 7117(a)(1) of the Statute /1/
because they generally apply to the civilian work force as a whole. /2/
Therefore, the Authority concludes that the Union's proposal is
inconsistent with FTR paragraph 1-1.3, a Government-wide regulation, and
is not within the duty to bargain under section 7117(a)(1) of the
Statute.
Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and
it hereby is, dismissed. /3/
Issued, Washington, D.C., October 28, 1985
Henry B. Frazier III Acting
Chairman
William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ Section 7117(a)(1) provides:
Sec. 7117. Duty to bargain in good faith; compelling need;
duty to consult.
* * * *
(a)(1) Subject to paragraph (2) of this subsection, the duty to
bargain in good faith shall, to the extent not inconsistent with
any Federal law or any Government-wide rule or regulation, extend
to matters which are the subject of any rule or regulation only if
the rule or regulation is not a Government-wide rule or
regulation.
/2/ See generally National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 6 and
Internal Revenue Service, New Orleans District, 3 FLRA 748,
752-755(1980).
/3/ In view of the decision herein, the Authority finds it
unnecessary to address the Agency's specific contentions as to the
negotiability of the proposal.