NTEU and HHS Region X, Seattle (Authority decision, July 31, 1986)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismisses the negotiability petition. An aggrieved person may petition an appropriate United States court of appeals for review within 60 days after issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a).

Plain-English summary

NTEU appealed after HHS Region X asserted that a proposal before the Federal Service Impasses Panel was outside the duty to bargain. HHS later withdrew its allegation of nonnegotiability. The Authority found that no negotiability issue remained to decide and dismissed the union's petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7105(a)(2)(E), 5 U.S.C. § 7117.
• Outcome: Negotiability petition dismissed after the agency withdrew its allegation.
• Key point: Withdrawal of the agency’s nonnegotiability allegation left no issue for review.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v22 p997 ]

22:0997(99)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

22 FLRA No. 99

NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, REGION X,
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
Activity

Case No. 0-NG-1275

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.

From the record before the Authority, it appears that during the course of proceedings before the Federal Service Impasses Panel, the Activity by letter dated May 5, 1986, notified both the Panel and Union that it considered the issue before the Panel as contradictory to section 7114(c) of the Statute and not negotiable. On May 13, 1986, pursuant to section 7117 of the Statute and section 2424.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, the Union filed a petition for review as to whether the disputed proposal was within the duty to bargain. Subsequently, in a letter dated June 13, 1986, the Agency withdrew the allegation of nonnegotiability.

Since the Agency has withdrawn the allegation concerning the Union's proposal, there is no longer an issue as to whether the proposal is within the parties' duty to bargain under the Statute.

Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the petition for review in this case is hereby dismissed.

For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C., July 31, 1986.
/s/ Harrold J. Kessler
Harold D. Kessler
Director of Case Management