National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1745 and Veterans Administration Data Processing Center, Austin, Texas (Authority decision, December 14, 1988)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismisses the union's negotiability petition because no sufficiently specific bargaining proposal was presented for review. 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

NFFE Local 1745 petitioned for review of a negotiability issue involving a Veterans Administration data processing center in Austin. The Authority required the union to provide the specific language it had proposed to the agency. The union responded that it had submitted no specific proposal. Without a concrete matter proposed for bargaining, the Authority could not decide negotiability. It dismissed the petition without ruling on any proposed term.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Negotiability review conditions under 5 U.S.C. § 7117(c) and former 5 C.F.R. § 2424.1.
• Outcome: Petition dismissed for lack of a specific proposal.
• Key point: Negotiability review requires identifiable proposed bargaining language.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v33 p841 ]
33:0841(104)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

33 FLRA No. 104

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 1745

and

VETERANS
ADMINISTRATION

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION DATA PROCESSING
CENTER

AUSTIN, TEXAS

0-NG-1622

ORDER

December 14, 1988

On November 17, 1988, the Union filed with the Authority a petition for review of negotiability issues pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7117(c) and 5 C.F.R. § 2424.1. The proposal presented by the Union is not sufficiently specific to enable the Authority to make a negotiability decision, and must be dismissed.

A petition for review which does not present a proposal sufficiently specific to enable the Authority to make a negotiability decision does not meet the conditions for review set forth in 5 U.S.C. § 7117(c) and 5 C.F.R. § 2424.1. See, e.g., Maritime/Metal Trades Council and Panama Canal Commission, 18 FLRA 326 (1985); and Fort Bragg Unit of North Carolina Association of Educators, National Education Association and Fort Bragg Dependents Schools, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, 12 FLRA 519 (1983). The conditions governing review of a negotiability issue include a requirement that there be "a matter proposed to be bargained." See, e.g., Federal Employees Metal Trades Council and Department of the Navy, Mare island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California, 10 FLRA 407 (1982).

In this case, the record contains no evidence that the Union proposed any specific language for negotiation. See, e.g., American Federation of Government Employees, Local 491 and Veterans Administration Medical Center, Bath, New York, 29 FLRA 462 (1987).

By Order issued December 2, 1988, the Authority directed the Union to file with the Authority by December 12, 1988, any specific proposal it presented to the Agency, and to show cause why its petition should not be dismissed.

In its timely filed letter dated December 7, 1988, the Union states that it did not submit any specific proposal to the Agency.

Accordingly, the Union's petition for review is dismissed.

For the Authority.

_____
Clyde B. Blandford, Jr.

Acting Executive Director

FOOTNOTES:
(If blank, the decision does not
have footnotes.)