VA Medical Center, Newington and NAGE Local R1-109 (Authority decision, December 16, 1982)
Three Newington VA employees excluded from bargaining unit (FLRA 1-CU-20005)
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Authority precedent from 1982, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Final FLRA representation decision. The Authority resolves an original petition concerning a bargaining unit under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7111 and 7112. The matter involves an appropriate-unit determination; 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(2) excludes such orders from the ordinary 60-day court of appeals review provision.
Plain-English summary
NAGE Local R1-109 sought a ruling on three employees at the Newington VA Medical Center whom the agency said were supervisors. The Authority found that two food service foremen and a medical clerk trainee assigned and directed work and exercised other supervisory powers with independent judgment. It excluded all three from the bargaining unit. The Authority decided the original unit petition, with no regional director decision to review.
Decision snapshot
- Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7103(a)(10).
- Outcome: Three positions excluded from the bargaining unit.
- Key point: Independent supervisory judgment required exclusion from the unit.
Full text (FLRA public release)
[ v10 p668 ]
10:0668(111)CU
The decision of the Authority follows:
10 FLRA No. 111
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER
555 WILLARD AVENUE, NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT
Activity
and
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-109 /1/
Petitioner
Case No. 1-CU-20005
DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT
Upon an amended petition duly filed with the Federal Labor Relations Authority under section 7111(b)(2) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the Authority. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority finds: The National Association of Government Employees, Local R1-109 (NAGE) was recognized by the Activity on April 15, 1966, as the exclusive bargaining representative for a unit of all employees located at the Newington Veterans Administration Medical Center. Essentially, the petition seeks to clarify the bargaining unit status of Betty G. Wanczyk (Food Service worker Foreman, WS-7408-1), Emylee Douglas (Food Service Worker Foreman, WS-7408-1) and Betty Curnow (Supervisory Medical Clerk Trainee, GS-679-05), in view of the Activity's contention that they are supervisors /2/ and must be excluded from the bargaining unit.
The record establishes that Wanczyk assigns and directs work and disciplines subordinates; that Douglas assigns and directs work, has effectively recommended subordinates for promotion and awards, and has disciplined subordinates; and Curnow assigns and directs work and has effectively recommended the hiring of and awards for subordinates. The Authority further finds that the above duties are not merely routine or clerical in nature, but require the consistent exercise of independent judgment. Accordingly, the Authority finds these incumbents are supervisors within the meaning of section 7103(a)(10) of the Statute and must be excluded from the unit.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the unit sought to be clarified herein be, and it hereby is, clarified by excluding from said unit Betty G. Wanczyk (Food Service Worker Foreman, WS-7408-1), Emylee Douglas (Food Service Worker Foreman, WS-7408-1) and Betty Curnow (Supervisory Medical Clerk Trainee, GS-679-05).
Issued, Washington, D.C., December 16, 1982
Ronald W. Haughton, Chairman
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
Leon B. Applewhaite, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The names of the parties appear as amended at the hearing.
/2/ Section 7103(a)(10) of the Statute defines a "supervisor" as:
. . . an individual employed by an agency having authority in the interest of the agency to hire, direct, assign, promote, reward, transfer, furlough, layoff, recall, suspend, discipline, or remove employees, to adjust their grievances, or to effectively recommend such action, if the exercise of the authority is not merely routine or clerical in nature but requires the consistent exercise of independent judgment . . . .
Does this precedent still control your case?
Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace