AFGE Council 157 and Department of the Treasury, U.S. Mint (Authority decision, September 26, 1986)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismisses the union's negotiability petition as untimely. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review of this final Authority order 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 order unless the court orders a stay under § 7123(c).

Plain-English summary

AFGE Council 157 appealed the U.S. Mint's allegation that some union proposals were nonnegotiable. The agency mailed the allegation on August 14, 1986, and the union received it on August 20. The Authority held that the filing period ran from mailing, with the applicable added time for mail service, so the petition had to reach its national office by September 3. It arrived September 4. The Authority dismissed the petition without reaching the proposals.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Filing deadline under 5 U.S.C. § 7117(c)(2) and 5 C.F.R. § 2424.3.
• Outcome: Petition dismissed as untimely.
• Key point: The filing clock began when the agency mailed its allegation, not when the union received it.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v23 p462 ]

23:0462(66)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

23 FLRA No. 66

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, COUNCIL 157
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
U.S. MINT
Agency

Case No. 0-NG-1319

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 reivew was untimely filed and must be dismissed on that basis.

Under section 7117(c)(2) of the Statute and section 2424.3 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, the time limit for filing a petition for review of negotiability issues is 15 days after service on the Union of the Agency's allegation that the duty to bargain in good faith does not extend to the matter proposed to be bargained. Further, under section 2429.23(d) of the Authority's rules of procedure, the time limit established in section 7117(c)(2) of the Statute may not extended or waived by the Authority.

The documents the Union submitted with its petition for review indicate the Agency's allegation that certain Union proposals are nonnegotiable is dated August 14, 1986. The allegation apparently was served on the Union by mail on the same date. Therefore, under section 2424.3 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations as well as sections 2429.21 and 2429.22 which also are applicable to computation of the time limit here involved, the petition for review had to be filed, that is, received in the national office of the Authority, not later than the close of business on September 3, 1986. However, the petition was not filed with the Authority at its national office in Washington, D.C., until September 4, 1986.

As indicated by the Union's date stamp on the Agency's allegation of nonnegotiability, the Union received the allegation on August 20, 1986. However, as the period for filing the instant petition for review began on the date the Agency's allegation was served on the Union, that is, deposited in the mail (see section 2429.27(d) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations), and not on the date the allegation was received, the Union's appeal was untimely filed.

Accordingly, as the Union's petition for review was untimely filed, and apart from other considerations, it is hereby dismissed.

For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C., September 26, 1986.
/s/ Harold D. Kessler
Harold D. Kessler
Director of Case Management