Naval Air Station, Meridian, Mississippi and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2244 (Authority decision, June 1, 1982)

Meridian naval station unit excludes tenant activity employees (FLRA 4-CU-24)

Decision type
Authority decision
Docket
4-CU-24
Decided
June 1, 1982
Outcome
Other
Precedential status
Citable Authority precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-06

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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1982
The federal labor-relations law may have been amended, and later Authority or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FLRA release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (flra.gov)

Final FLRA representation decision. The Authority directly decided a unit-clarification petition. This appropriate-unit determination is excluded from the 60-day judicial-review provision by 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(2).

Plain-English summary

Naval Air Station Meridian asked whether civilian employees of separate tenant activities on the base belonged in a unit represented by AFGE Local 2244. The union favored a unit that included them. The Authority found that the tenant activities had separate commanders with personnel and labor relations authority, and that their employees did not share a clear community of interest with the station's employees. It clarified the unit to include only eligible employees of the naval air station. The Authority decided the petition directly, so no regional director ruling was affirmed or reversed.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: 5 U.S.C. §§ 7111(b)(2) and 7112(a)(1).
  • Outcome: Unit limited to eligible Naval Air Station Meridian employees.
  • Key point: Separate command and personnel authority kept tenant activity employees outside this station unit.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v09 p22 ]

09:0022(3)CU

The decision of the Authority follows:

9 FLRA No. 3

NAVAL AIR STATION,
MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI
Activity/Petitioner

and

LOCAL 2244, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
Labor Organization

Case No. 4-CU-24

DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT

UPON A PETITION DULY FILED 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 PETITIONER FILED A
CLARIFICATION OF UNIT PETITION SEEKING A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER THE
EMPLOYEES OF SEVERAL ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE TENANTS AT NAVAL AIR STATION,
MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI (NAS), ARE INCLUDED IN A UNIT OF RECOGNITION
REPRESENTED BY AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2244
(L. 2244). /1/ RECOGNITION WAS GRANTED TO L. 2244 BY THE COMMANDING
OFFICER, NAS, IN 1964 FOR A UNIT CONSISTING OF "126 ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES
ON THE STATION." AT THE TIME OF RECOGNITION ONLY TWO OF THE TENANTS
(VT-7 AND VT-9) WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE EXISTED AT NAS; HOWEVER,
THERE WERE NO CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES ATTACHED TO THEM AT THAT TIME. THE
OTHER TENANTS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED SINCE RECOGNITION WAS GRANTED. NAS
TAKES THE POSITION THAT THE UNIT IS, AND SHOULD BE, LIMITED TO EMPLOYEES
OF NAS ONLY; L. 2244, ON THE OTHER HAND, CONTENDS THAT A UNIT
CONSISTING OF EMPLOYEES OF NAS AS WELL AS THOSE OF THE TENANTS IS
APPROPRIATE.

THE RECORD REVEALS THAT WHILE, IN SOME INSTANCES, THE EMPLOYEES
INVOLVED ARE SUBJECT TO SIMILAR PERSONNEL POLICIES, PRACTICES AND
WORKING CONDITIONS AND ARE PURSUANT TO A SUPPORT AGREEMENT SERVICED BY A
COMMON PERSONNEL OFFICE, THEY ARE, NEVERTHELESS, UNDER SEPARATE
COMMANDING OFFICERS OR OFFICERS-IN-CHARGE WHO RETAIN PERSONNEL AND LABOR
RELATIONS AUTHORITY. MOREOVER, WHILE THERE IS SOME FUNCTIONAL
RELATIONSHIP AMONG VARIOUS OF THE TENANTS AND NAS, ON THE WHOLE THE
TENANTS CONSTITUTE FUNCTIONALLY DISTINCT GROUPS OF EMPLOYEES. IN VIEW
OF THESE FACTORS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT INCLUSION OF THE EMPLOYEES OF
TENANTS WITH THE EMPLOYEES OF NAS WOULD NOT PROMOTE EFFECTIVE DEALINGS
WITH, OR EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATIONS OF, THE AGENCY. /2/ NOR DO THE
EMPLOYEES OF TENANTS SHARE A CLEAR AND IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF
INTEREST WITH EMPLOYEES OF NAS. SEE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NAVY
REGIONAL DATA AUTOMATION CENTER, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA AND DEPARTMENT OF
THE NAVY, REGIONAL ACCOUNTING AND DISBURSING CENTER, JACKSONVILLE,
FLORIDA, 4 FLRA NO. 18(1980). THUS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE UNIT
IS APPROPRIATELY LIMITED TO ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF NAS.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT TO BE CLARIFIED HEREIN BE,
AND IT HEREBY IS, CLARIFIED TO INCLUDE ONLY EMPLOYEES OF THE NAVAL AIR
STATION, MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JUNE 1, 1982

RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN

HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER

LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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

/1/ A "TENANT" ACTIVITY WAS DEFINED AT THE HEARING AS BEING AN
ORGANIZATION WHICH IS PHYSICALLY LOCATED ON A BASE BUT WHICH HAS A
SEPARATE COMMANDING OFFICER OR OFFICER-IN-CHARGE. THE TENANT ACTIVITIES
INVOLVED HEREIN ARE: NAVY TECHNICAL TRAINING CENTER (NTTC); PERSONNEL
SUPPORT DETACHMENT (PSD); NAVAL TRAINING AIR WING 1 (THE WING); NAVY
TRAINING SQUADRONS 7, 9, AND 19 (VT-7, VT-9 AND VT-19 OR SQUADRONS);
MERIDIAN BRANCH CLINIC (MEDICAL), MERIDIAN BRANCH CLINIC (DENTAL); AND
DATA PROCESS SERVICING CENTER (NARDAC).

/2/ SECTION 7112(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE PROVIDES:

(A)(1) THE AUTHORITY SHALL DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATENESS OF ANY UNIT.
THE AUTHORITY SHALL

DETERMINE IN EACH CASE WHETHER, IN ORDER TO ENSURE EMPLOYEES THE
FULLEST FREEDOM IN EXERCISING

THE RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER THIS CHAPTER, THE APPROPRIATE UNIT SHOULD
BE ESTABLISHED ON AN

AGENCY, PLANT, INSTALLATION, FUNCTIONAL, OR OTHER BASIS AND SHALL
DETERMINE ANY UNIT TO BE AN

APPROPRIATE UNIT ONLY IF THE DETERMINATION WILL ENSURE A CLEAR AND
IDENTIFIABLE COMMUNITY OF

INTEREST AMONG THE EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIT AND WILL PROMOTE EFFECTIVE
DEALINGS WITH, AND

EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATIONS OF, THE AGENCY INVOLVED.

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