Military Traffic Management Command and AFGE Local 1157 (Authority decision, October 29, 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

AFGE Local 1157 filed a negotiability petition involving the Military Traffic Management Command. The Authority told the union about several procedural defects by telephone and then by letter. It gave the union 13 more days to complete the petition and warned that failure could cause dismissal. The union made no submission by the deadline, so the Authority dismissed the petition for noncompliance with its rules.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Negotiability petition requirements in 5 C.F.R. § 2424.4.
• Outcome: Petition dismissed for failure to correct procedural defects.
• Key point: A union must complete its petition under the Authority's rules after receiving an opportunity to correct deficiencies.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v20 p546 ]

20:0546(67)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

20 FLRA No. 67

HEADQUARTERS, MILITARY TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT COMMAND
Activity

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1157, AFL-CIO
Union

Case Nos. 0-NG-1174

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 and section 2424.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by the Union. For the reasons indicated below, it has been determined that the Union's petition for review must be dismissed.

By Authority letter dated October 9, 1985, the Union was informed that processing of its negotiability appeal by the Authority was contingent upon compliance with Parts 2424 and 2429 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. The letter recited that the Union had been contacted by telephone on two earlier occasions concerning the nature of, and the need to correct certain procedural deficiencies in its appeal. Although the Union had been afforded time in which to comply with the Authority's rules of procedure and to complete its petition for review, the Union had taken no action to remedy the deficiencies in its appeal as of the date of the letter.

As was noted in the Authority's letter, the Union's appeal failed to comply with sections 2424.4(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), and 2424.4(b) of the Regulations. The Union was informed of the specific actions it had to take to so comply and to complete its appeal, and was granted 13 days in which to do so. The Union was advised that further processing of its petition for review was contingent upon compliance with the cited provisions of the Authority's rules of procedure and was put on notice that failure to comply within the time limit provided could result in dismissal of the exception.

The Union has made no submission within the time limit provided. Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the Union's application for review is hereby dismissed for failure to comply with the Authority's rules of procedure.

For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C., October 29, 1985
Harold D. Kessler
Managing Director for Case
Processing