National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 238 (Union) and Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Western Nevada Indian Agency, Stewart Indian School, Stewart, Nevada (Activity) (Authority decision, December 22, 1980)

Final FLRA decision. This negotiability order ends the petition before the Authority. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review in a court of appeals within 60 days of issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a).

Plain-English summary

A union at the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Stewart Indian School proposed up to 48 hours of administrative leave in a year for union officials to attend relevant union-sponsored training. The agency said Comptroller General standards barred the proposal. The Authority held that the proposal violated no government-wide rule or regulation. It rejected the agency’s nonnegotiability position and ordered bargaining on request.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7117.
• Outcome: Agency nonnegotiability allegation set aside; training leave proposal negotiable.
• Key point: Limited official time for relevant union training did not violate the cited government-wide standards.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v04 p785 ]

04:0785(101)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

4 FLRA No. 101

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL
238
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS,
WESTERN NEVADA INDIAN AGENCY,
STEWART INDIAN SCHOOL, STEWART,
NEVADA
Activity

Case No. 0-NG-141

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE

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

UNION PROPOSAL

ARTICLE 21.11 LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS TRAINING

(A) THE EMPLOYER AGREES TO GRANT ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE TO EMPLOYEES
WHO ARE UNION OFFICIALS

FOR THE PURPOSE OF ATTENDING UNION SPONSORED TRAINING SESSIONS,
PROVIDING THE TRAINING IS OF

CONCERN TO THE EMPLOYEES IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS UNION
REPRESENTATIVES. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE

FOR THIS PURPOSE WILL NOT EXCEED 48 HOURS FOR ANY EMPLOYEE WITHIN A
12 MONTH PERIOD.

QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL TO GRANT UP TO 48 HOURS
OF ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE TO EMPLOYEES WHO ARE UNION OFFICIALS WITHIN A 12
MONTH PERIOD TO ATTEND UNION SPONSORED TRAINING IS WITHIN THE AGENCY'S
DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE OR, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY, IS
OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN BECAUSE IT WOULD V.OLATE STANDARDS
ESTABLISHED BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL.

OPINION

CONCLUSION AND ORDER: THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY
GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULE OR REGULATION. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION
2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR 2424.10 AS
AMENDED BY 45 F.R. 48575), IT IS ORDERED THAT THE AGENCY SHALL UPON
REQUEST (OR AS OTHERWISE AGREED BY THE PARTIES) BARGAIN ON THIS
PROPOSAL. /1/

REASONS: THE PROPOSAL HEREIN DISPUTE, WHICH WOULD GRANT UP TO 48
HOURS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE TO UNION OFFICIALS WITHIN A 12 MONTH
PERIOD TO ATTEND UNION SPONSORED TRAINING, BEARS NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE
FROM SIMILAR PORTIONS OF THE UNION PROPOSAL WHICH WAS BEFORE THE
AUTHORITY IN NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 951 AND
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION MID-PACIFIC REGIONAL
OFFICE, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, 3 FLRA NO. 128 (1980) AND HELD TO BE
WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE. IN THAT CASE THE
AUTHORITY, REJECTING AN ARGUMENT IDENTICAL TO THAT RELIED UPON BY THE
AGENCY HERE (I.E., THAT THE PROPOSAL WOULD VIOLATE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED
BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL), DETERMINED THAT THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF
THE UNION PROPOSAL AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL TIME FOR UNION SPONSORED
TRAINING DID NOT VIOLATE ANY GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULE OR REGULATION. /2/
THEREFORE, BASED ON THE REASONS SET FORTH IN GREATER DETAIL IN
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, THE PROPOSAL HEREIN
DISPUTE MUST ALSO BE HELD NOT TO VIOLATE ANY APPLICABLE GOVERNMENT-WIDE
RULE OR REGULATION.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., DECEMBER 22, 1980

RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN

HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER

LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

COPIES OF THE DECISION OF THE FLRA IN THE SUBJECT PROCEEDING HAVE
THIS DAY BEEN MAILED TO THE PARTIES LISTED:

MR. ROBERT JAMES

PRESIDENT, LOCAL 238

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL

EMPLOYEES

BOX 218

STEWART, NEVADA 89437

MR. MORRIS A. SIMMS

DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240

HONORABLE CECIL D. ANDRUS

SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240

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

/1/ IN SO DECIDING THAT THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL IS WITHIN THE DUTY TO
BARGAIN, THE AUTHORITY MAKES NO JUDGMENT AS TO THE MERITS OF THE
PROPOSAL.

/2/ THE PORTION OF THE PROPOSAL FOUND TO BE NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO
BARGAIN IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CASE IS NOT
ENCOMPASSED BY THE PROPOSAL AT ISSUE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY IN THIS CASE.