American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1482 and Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow (Authority decision, March 23, 1988)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority finds the union's proposal to permit privately owned bicycles in the Repair Division building outside the base's duty to bargain and dismisses the 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).

Plain-English summary

The Marine Corps Logistics Base in Barstow planned to ban bicycles inside a large repair building after near misses involving bicycles and industrial equipment. AFGE Local 1482 proposed allowing privately owned bicycles subject to safety rules and penalties for violations. The Authority found that the ban was linked to protecting people and property, so the proposal conflicted with management's right to set internal security practices. It also found that employees used bicycles to deliver items and perform inspections, making bicycle use a method of carrying out the work that management could choose. It dismissed the union's petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. §§ 7105(a)(2)(E), 7106(a)(1), and 7106(b)(1).
• Outcome: Bicycle proposal outside the duty to bargain; petition dismissed.
• Key point: The proposal would limit the base's safety related bicycle ban and its choice of work methods.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v31 p916 ]

31:0916(71)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

31 FLRA NO. 71

AKA: 0-NG-1483
31 FLRA 916

Date: 23 MAR 1988

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
LOCAL 1482

Union

and

MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS
BASE, BARSTOW, CALIFORNIA

Agency

Case No. 0-NG-1483

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE

I. Statement of the Case

This case is before the Authority because of a negotiability appeal filed under section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute (the Statute). It concerns a proposal which the Union submitted in response to the Agency's decision to ban the use of all bicycles in the Repair Division building at the Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow.

The proposal seeks to allow employees to continue to use their privately owned bicycles in the Repair Division building during work hours. We find that the proposal is nonnegotiable because it interferes with the Agency's rights under section 7106 of the Statute to determine its internal security practices and the means of performing work.

II. The Proposal

a. That employees at Repair Division can continue to use their private bicycles during work hours subject to the following provisions:

(1) that all bicycles meet minimum safety standards set by safety;

(2) that the bicycles be marked with the employee name and shop;

(3) that the bicycle rider be licensed to ride bicycles; and

(4) that Repair Division establish a safe speed limit for bicycles within Repair Division.

b. If an employee is found to violate safety pertaining to the riding of a bicycle, the following procedure will be followed:

(1) he/she will be counselled by his/her supervisor; and

(2) his/her license will be revoked for 30 days for the first offense; 90 days for the second offense; permanently removed for the third offense.

(Only the underscored portion is in dispute.)

III. Positions of the Parties

In its petition, the Union argues that this proposal is a better alternative to the Agency's plan to ban the use of all bicycles within the Repair Division. The Union further asserts that its proposal adequately addresses the Agency's safety concerns.

The Agency states that it decided to ban bicycle use within the Repair Division because of a mounting safety problem which could cause serious injury to persons and property. It asserts that the decision constitutes an exercise of its right to determine its internal security practices. The Agency also argues that employees use bicycles to perform work, such as delivering parts and documents and performing inspections. In view of this use, the Agency contends that bicycles are a method and means of performing work within the definition of section 7106(b)(1) of the Statute.

The Agency asserts that because the proposal interferes with these management rights, it is nonnegotiable. The Union did not file a response to the Agency's statement of position.

IV. Analysis and Conclusions

1. The Proposal Interferes with Management's Right to
   Determine Internal Security Practices

According to the uncontroverted statements of the Agency, the building, which is the focus of the bicycle ban, encompasses 10 acres and houses maintenance repair facilities where jeeps, tanks and other heavy equipment are overhauled. More than 1,000 employees work in the building. Approximately 200 bicycles--most privately owned--were operated in the building along with various industrial equipment. The Agency asserts that an increasing number of "near misses" between the bicycles and the industrial equipment as well as safety concerns over the increasing vehicular traffic within the building led it to propose a ban on bicycles in the building.

An agency's right to determine its internal security practices under section 7106(a)(1) includes the right to determine policies and take actions which are part of its plan to secure or safeguard its personnel and physical property. See, for example, Defense Logistics Council of American Federation of Government Employees Locals and Defense logistics Agency, 20 FLRA 166 (1985), reversed in part as to other matters sub nom. Defense Logistics Council of American Federation of Government Employees Locals v. FLRA, 810 F.2d 234 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

Where a link has been established between an agency's action and its expressed security concerns, we will not review the merits of that action. See National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 15 and Department of the Army, U.S. Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command, Rock Island, Illinois, 30 FLRA 1046, 1056-57 (1988). We find that such linkage is present in this case. The Agency states that it proposed the bicycle ban as a method of preventing accidents and safeguarding Agency personnel and property. The Union does not dispute this purpose and, in fact, its proposal reflects various safety concerns. We find, therefore, that the Agency's prohibition of bicycle riding in its facilities constitutes an exercise of its right under section 7106(a)(1) to determine internal security practices.

The proposal would limit the Agency's ability to ban bicycle riding by exempting privately owned bicycles from the prohibition. By doing so, the proposal conflicts with the Agency's right to determine its internal security practices.

2. The Proposal Interferes with Management's Right to
   Determine the Methods and Means of Performing Work

The Agency asserts that the proposal addresses the tools and devices which employees use to perform their work. In support of this claim, the Agency states that the proposal relates to the equipment which employees use to perform such tasks as delivering parts and documents and performing inspections. The Union does not claim otherwise. Based on the Agency's uncontroverted statements, we conclude that the proposal seeks to allow employees to use bicycles in performing their duties. Therefore, this case is distinguished from those in which the Authority found that the transportation of employees as proposed by the Union was not inconsistent with section 7106(b)(1) because it was not principally related to the agency's work. National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 153 and Department of the Treasury, U.S. Customs Service, 21 FLRA 1116 (1986) (Proposal 6 requiring the agency to provide a government vehicle for employees to travel from one work site to another during established tours of duty); American Federation of Government Employees, AFL - CIO, Local 3525 and United States Department of Justice, Board of Immigration Appeals, 10 FLRA 61 (1982) (Proposal 1 requiring the agency to provide shuttle bus service for relocated employees to facilitate their access to such services as a credit union and health unit and to research facilities).

The choice of using bicycles--a particular mode of transportation--for accomplishing an agency's mission is a decision under section 7106(b)(1) as to the methods and means to be used for the accomplishment of its work. That is, it is a decision concerning the instrumentalities, agents, tools, devices which will be used to accomplish the agency's work. See, for example, National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 2052 and Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Boise District Office, 30 FLRA 797 (1987) (Proposal 20). This proposal would interfere with the Agency's discretion to determine whether bicycles will be included in the methods and means used to accomplish the work of the Agency. Because of this effect, the proposal directly interferes with section 7106(b)(1).

3. Conclusion

The proposal is outside the duty to bargain because it interferes with the Agency's right to determine its internal security practices as well as the methods and means of its performing work.

V. Order

The petition for review is dismissed.

Issued, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1988.

Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman

Jean McKee, Member

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY