AFGE Local 1482 and Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow (Authority decision, December 31, 1981)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final Authority order. 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). Filing a petition does not stay the Authority's order unless the court orders a stay under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(c).

Plain-English summary

AFGE Local 1482 sought review of the Marine Corps Logistics Base's allegation that a motorcycle-licensing proposal was nonnegotiable. The agency later withdrew that allegation. The Authority found that no dispute remained over the duty to bargain and dismissed the appeal as moot. It did not decide whether the agency regulation had a compelling need or whether the proposal was negotiable.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7117(a)(2).
• Outcome: Petition for review dismissed as moot.
• Key point: Withdrawal of the agency's allegation ended the negotiability dispute.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v07 p470 ]

07:0470(72)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

7 FLRA No. 72

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1482
(Union)

and

MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS
BASE, BARSTOW, CALIFORNIA
(Activity)

Case No. 0-NG-563

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

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

THE RECORD IN THIS CASE INDICATES THAT DURING NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN
THE ACTIVITY AND THE UNION, THE ACTIVITY ALLEGED THAT A UNION PROPOSAL
CONCERNING THE LICENSING OF MOTORCYCLES WAS NONNEGOTIABLE. THE UNION
SOUGHT THE AUTHORITY'S DETERMINATION, PURSUANT TO SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF
THE STATUTE AND SECTION 2424.1(B)(3) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES OF
PROCEDURE (5 CFR 2424.1(B)(3)(1981)), AS TO WHETHER A COMPELLING NEED
EXISTS FOR THE AGENCY REGULATION IN QUESTION. SUBSEQUENTLY, IN ITS
STATEMENT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.6 OF THE RULES, THE AGENCY, IN
EFFECT, WITHDREW THE ACTIVITY'S ALLEGATION OF NONNEGOTIABILITY.

SINCE THE AGENCY HAS WITHDRAWN THE ALLEGATION CONCERNING THE UNION'S
PROPOSAL, THERE IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE AS TO WHETHER THE PROPOSAL IN THIS
CASE IS WITHIN THE PARTIES' DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE. THE
DISPUTE INVOLVED IN THE UNION'S APPEAL, THEREFORE, HAS BEEN RENDERED
MOOT. ACCORDINGLY,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW HEREIN BE,
AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., DECEMBER 31, 1981

HAROLD T. KESSLER
FOR JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR