NFFE Local 1332 and Department of the Army, Headquarters, Army Material Command (Authority decision, May 24, 1985)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority dismissing a negotiability petition. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review by filing a petition in an appropriate United States court of appeals within 60 days after issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a). Filing a petition does not stay the Authority's order unless the court orders a stay under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(c).

Plain-English summary

NFFE Local 1332 sought review after Army Material Command declared a proposal on areas of consideration nonnegotiable. The agency later withdrew its objection in writing, although the union asked to reinstate its petition. With no remaining dispute over whether the proposal was within the duty to bargain, the Authority dismissed the petition. It did not decide the proposal's negotiability.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Negotiability review under 5 U.S.C. § 7105(a)(2)(E).
• Outcome: Petition dismissed after withdrawal of the nonnegotiability allegation.
• Key point: The agency's withdrawal left no negotiability issue for review.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v18 p193 ]

18:0193(26)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

18 FLRA No. 26

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1332
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
HEADQUARTERS, ARMY MATERIAL COMMAND
Agency

Case No. 0-NG-1043

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW

This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute on a petition for review of a negotiability issue filed by the Union.

The record before the Authority in this case indicates that during the course of negotiations, the Union submitted a proposal concerning areas of consideration. By letter dated August 14, 1984, the Agency declared the Union's proposal to be nonnegotiable. The Union then filed an unfair labor practice charge with the Region and the instant petition for review with the Authority. Pursuant to section 2423.5 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations which requires a selection of procedures, the Union requested that processing of the negotiability appeal be suspended pending resolution of the unfair labor practice dispute. In a letter to the Authority dated January 22, 1985, the Union advised that the unfair labor practice charge had been withdrawn but requested that the processing of the instant petition be held in abeyance as the parties were currently negotiating the subject proposal. Subsequently, the Union in a letter to the Authority dated March 12, 1985, requested that its petition for review be reinstated. Thereafter, the Agency filed its statement of position with the Authority on April 17, 1985, and advised that the declaration of nonnegotiability had been withdrawn in writing by the Agency and acknowledged by the Union on October 10, 1984. Accordingly, the Agency considered the issue moot.

As the record indicates, /1/ the Agency has withdrawn the allegation of nonnegotiability concerning the Union's proposal on areas of consideration. Thus, there is no longer an issue as to whether the proposal in this case is within the parties' duty to bargain under the Statute. See e.g. National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 15 and U.S. Department of the Army, Army Armament Munitions and Chemical Command, 17 FLRA No. 47 (1985).

Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the petition for review in this case is hereby dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., May 24, 1985 Harold D. Kessler, Managing Director for Case Processing

--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------

/1/ The Union did not file a Reply Brief in this case.