Federal Union of Scientists and Engineers, National Association of Government Employees, Local R1-144 (Union) and Naval Underwater Systems Center, Newport Naval Base, Newport, Rhode Island (Activity) (Authority decision, May 8, 1980)

Navy position review appeal dismissed as moot (FLRA 0-NG-140)

Decision type
Authority decision
Docket
0-NG-140
Decided
May 8, 1980
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Authority precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-06
Cited standards

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Authority precedent from 1980, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1980
The federal labor-relations law may have been amended, and later Authority or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FLRA release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (flra.gov)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismissed this negotiability appeal without a merits ruling. Judicial review of final Authority orders is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a), subject to its statutory exceptions.

Plain-English summary

A union sought bargaining over how a Navy activity would randomly select positions for review. The activity said the review was finished before the appeal was decided, and the union did not dispute that statement. The Authority dismissed the appeal as moot without reaching timeliness or negotiability.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7117.
  • Outcome: Negotiability appeal dismissed as moot.
  • Key point: Completion of the position review ended the live dispute.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v03 p179 ]

03:0179(24)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

3 FLRA No. 24

FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS
AND ENGINEERS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-144
Union

and

NAVAL UNDERWATER SYSTEMS CENTER,
NEWPORT NAVAL BASE,
NEWPORT, RHODE ISLAND
Activity

Case No. 0-NG-140

DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY APPEAL

THIS CASE COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (THE
AUTHORITY) PURSUANT TO SEC. 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE) (5 U.S.C. 7101-7135).

THE NAVAL UNDERWATER SYSTEMS CENTER, NEWPORT NAVAL BASE (THE
ACTIVITY), DECIDED TO CONDUCT A POSITION REVIEW OF ITS GRADE 13 THROUGH
15 POSITIONS. FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-144 (THE UNION), REQUESTED
THE ACTIVITY TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POSITION REVIEW AND TO
DELAY IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REVIEW UNTIL THE UNION HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO
REVIEW THE INFORMATION. THE PARTIES DISCUSSED THE POSITION REVIEW AT
WHICH TIME THE UNION WAS TOLD THAT THE REVIEW WOULD BE CONDUCTED BY
EMPLOYEES OF THE ACTIVITY AND AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AND THAT THE
POSITIONS TO BE REVIEWED WOULD BE SELECTED BY A RANDOM PROCESS.

THE UNION FOLLOWED THE MEETING WITH A MEMORANDUM STATING THAT THE
ACTIVITY HAD NOT RESPONDED TO A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW
AND REQUESTED TO NEGOTIATE ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE REVIEW ON EMPLOYEES.
THE ACTIVITY SUPPLIED THE UNION WITH INFORMATION ABOUT THE RANDOM
SELECTION PROCESS BUT DENIED THE REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE. THE UNION SENT
ANOTHER MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDING TWO METHODS FOR RANDOMLY SELECTING
POSITIONS FOR REVIEW AND STATING THAT NEGOTIATION ABOUT THE RANDOM
SELECTION METHOD WOULD BE REQUESTED IF NEITHER UNION RECOMMENDATION
WERE
ACCEPTABLE. THE ACTIVITY STATED THAT IT WOULD USE ITS PREVIOUSLY
DEVELOPED RANDOM SELECTION METHOD AND THAT THE METHOD USED TO DIVIDE
WORK ASSIGNMENTS BETWEEN OUTSIDE CONTRACT PERSONNEL AND ACTIVITY
PERSONNEL IS NOT NEGOTIABLE. THE UNION RESPONDED TWO DAYS LATER WITH A
REQUEST THAT THE ACTIVITY STATE IN WRITING WHETHER IT WOULD NEGOTIATE
ABOUT THE METHOD FOR RANDOMLY SELECTING POSITIONS FOR REVIEW, NOT THE
PERSONNEL BY WHOM THE REVIEW WAS TO BE PERFORMED. THE ACTIVITY DID NOT
RESPOND.

THE UNION FILED THE INSTANT NEGOTIABILITY APPEAL WITH THE AUTHORITY,
EMPHASIZING THAT THE REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE DID NOT CONCERN THE PERSONNEL
BY WHOM THE ACTIVITY CONDUCTED ITS POSITION REVIEW. IN ITS STATEMENT OF
POSITION, FILED WITH THE AUTHORITY THE ACTIVITY STATES, INTER ALIA, THAT
THE POSITION REVIEW HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THAT THE UNION'S APPEAL HAS
THEREFORE BECOME MOOT. THE UNION HAS NOT RESPONDED TO THE ACTIVITY'S
STATEMENT.

UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SET FORTH, IT IS CONCLUDED, AS THE AGENCY
CONTENDED WITHOUT OBJECTION BY THE UNION, THAT THE NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE INSTANT APPEAL WAS RENDERED MOOT BY THE
COMPLETION OF THE POSITION REVIEW. ACCORDINGLY, WITHOUT PASSING ON THE
TIMELINESS OF THE APPEAL OR THE MERITS OF THE DISPUTE, THE APPEAL IS
DISMISSED.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 8, 1980

RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN

HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER

LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace