National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1705 and General Services Administration (Authority decision, May 8, 1985)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority in a negotiability case. 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

A union proposed one competitive area for bargaining unit employees in several General Services Administration offices around Washington, D.C., for reduction in force purposes. Federal rules require a competitive area to include all employees within the specified organizational and geographic boundaries. The Authority found that the proposal would therefore affect employees outside the union's bargaining unit. Because GSA had not chosen to bargain over that matter, the Authority dismissed the union's petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Competitive area regulation at 5 C.F.R. § 351.402(b).
• Outcome: Negotiability petition dismissed.
• Key point: A competitive area proposal affecting employees outside the bargaining unit was outside the agency's duty to bargain.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v17 p945 ]

17:0945(123)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

17 FLRA No. 123

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1705
Union

and

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Agency

Case No. 0-NG-945

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE

The petition for review in 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), and presents an issue concerning the negotiability of the following Union proposal:

The competitive area for bargaining unit employees shall consist of employees of FPRS, OIRM, GMA, and PBS located within the GSA Central Office organization, Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determination. The instant proposal seeks to define a competitive area within the Agency for purposes of reduction-in-force (RIF). Based on the record it appears that the four organizational elements designated in the proposal, namely FPRS, OIRM, GMA and PBS are subordinate portions of the Agency's metropolitan Washington, D.C. Central Office and are composed of both bargaining unit employees and nonbargaining unit employees.

The Union claims that its proposal is not intended to require either the inclusion of nonbargaining unit employees in the proposed competitive area or the exclusion of nonbargaining unit employees from the proposed competitive area. Instead, the Union argues that its proposal is intended only to place all bargaining unit employees in a single competitive area.

However, contrary to the Union's position, governing RIF regulations set out at 5 CFR 351.402(b) (1984) /2/ require a competitive area to be defined "solely in terms of an agency's organizational unit(s) and geographical location, and must include all employees within the competitive area so defined." Notwithstanding the Union's intention only to place all bargaining unit employees in a single competitive area the proposal directly affects the working conditions of nonbargaining unit employees since the establishment of a competitive area must necessarily include nonbargaining unit employees within its boundaries.

The Authority, in American Federation of Government Employees, Local 32, AFL-CIO and Office of Personnel Management, 14 FLRA 754 (1984), appeal docketed, No. 84-1250 (D.C. Cir. June 15, 1984) has addressed the negotiability of a proposal dealing with competitive areas for RIF purposes where the record established that the proposed competitive area affected non-bargaining unit employees. In that case the Authority noted that it is well established that the duty to bargain does not extend to matters concerning positions and employees outside the bargaining unit. International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO, NASA Headquarters Professional Association and National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Headquarters, Washington, D.C., 8 FLRA 212 (1982) and cases cited therein at note 5. However, an agency generally may bargain over such matters if it so chooses. See, e.g., American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2 and Department of the Army, Military District of Washington, 4 FLRA 450 (1980). Insofar as the proposal defining a competitive area in Office of Personnel Management directly determined conditions of employment of nonunit employees, it was found to concern matters beyond the representation rights of the union and, hence, not within the agency's obligation to bargain. See also Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Local 556 and Department of the Army, Office of the Adjutant General, Hale Koa Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii, 9 FLRA 687 (1982).

Therefore, since the record in this case establishes that the proposal directly determines conditions of employment of employees not within the bargaining unit and the Agency has not elected to bargain on such matter, it must be concluded, for the reasons stated in Office of Personnel Management, that the proposal is similarly outside the duty to bargain.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., May 8, 1985 Henry B. Frazier III, Acting Chairman William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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

/1/ The Agency's request to file an additional submission in this case pursuant to section 2424.8 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations is denied.

/2/ This OPM regulation is a Government-wide regulation within the meaning of section 7117(a)(1) of the Statute because, pursuant to 5 CFR 351.202 (1984), it applies to the Federal civilian work force as a whole. National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 6 and Internal Revenue Service, New Orleans District, 3 FLRA 748, 751-755 (1980).