AFGE Local 1931 and Naval Weapons Station Concord (Authority decision, September 16, 1985)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority on 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

The union proposed that employees arrested for impaired driving keep driving privileges on the naval station until conviction and that suspensions follow specified limits. The Authority found that this would restrict the Navy's preventive measures to protect people and property on its premises. It held the proposal outside the duty to bargain and dismissed the petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Internal security practices under 5 U.S.C. § 7106(a)(1).
• Outcome: Proposal outside the duty to bargain; petition dismissed.
• Key point: The Navy could set rules for suspending driving privileges as an internal security measure.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v20 p170 ]

20:0170(20)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

20 FLRA No. 20

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1931
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NAVAL WEAPONS STATION, CONCORD, CALIFORNIA Agency

Case No. 0-NG-1098

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 an issue regarding the negotiability of the following Union proposal:

Section 1: Employees arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs will continue to maintain their driving privileges until such time as they are convicted by a civilian court.

Section 2: The Employer agrees that any suspension of driving privileges of employees suspected of drunk driving because of refusal to take a sobriety test will be in accordance with California State law. No disciplinary action will be taken that is greater than that administered by the courts.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determination. The disputed proposal in the instant case is to the same effect as the proposal which the Authority held to be nonnegotiable in Defense Logistics Council of American Federation of Government Employees Locals and Defense Logistics Agency, 20 FLRA No. 19(1985). The proposal in that case would have created restrictions on the agency's choice of preventive measures taken to guard against harm to its property and personnel, in particular, the decision as to the circumstances under which the privilege of driving on its premises should be suspended. The Authority found that the proposal interfered with the agency's right to determine its internal security practices and concluded that it was not within the agency's duty to bargain under section 7106(a)(1) of the Statute. In like manner, the instant proposal would restrict the Agency's right to determine policies and actions which are part of its plan to secure or safeguard its personnel and physical property. Therefore, based on Defense Logistics Agency, supra, and the precedent cited therein, the instant proposal is likewise outside the duty to bargain under section 7106(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. /1/

Issued, Washington, D.C., September 16, 1985 (s) HENRY B. FRAZIER III Henry B. Frazier III, Acting Chairman (s) WILLIAM J. MCGINNIS, JR. William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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

/1/ In so deciding, the Authority finds it unnecessary to consider the Agency's other contentions concerning the nonnegotiability of the proposal.