Department of the Navy, Naval Air Rework Facility, Norfolk; National Association of Government Employees, Local R4-84; and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Local Lodge 39 (Authority decision, April 21, 1983)

Department of the Navy, Naval Air Rework Facility, Norfolk; National Association of Government Employees, Local R4-84; and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Local Lodge 39 (FLRA 43-RO-106): Norfolk Navy election leaflet objections rejected

Decision type
Authority decision
Docket
43-RO-106
Decided
April 21, 1983
Outcome
Upheld
Precedential status
Citable Authority precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-06

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Authority precedent from 1983, 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 1983
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)

FLRA representation decision. The Authority denied review of the Regional Director's election objections report and directed further action. The representation proceeding remained pending. Judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(2) excludes an order involving an appropriate unit determination under § 7112.

Plain-English summary

NAGE challenged a Norfolk Navy representation election, saying leaflets from the competing union had misstated the law and NAGE's finances. The Regional Director rejected the objections. The Authority agreed because NAGE had enough time to answer the first two statements and had actually answered the financial claim. It denied review and directed the Regional Director to take further action.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: Review of election objections in a representation case.
  • Outcome: Regional Director's rejection of objections upheld; further action directed.
  • Key point: Campaign claims did not justify setting aside the election when NAGE had time to respond.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v12 p15 ]

12:0015(5)RO

The decision of the Authority follows:

12 FLRA No. 5

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL AIR REWORK FACILITY
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
Activity

and

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R4-84
Petitioner

and

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS,
LOCAL LODGE 39, AFL-CIO
Intervenor

Case No. 43-RO-106

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR REVIEW

The Petitioner (NAGE) has filed a request for review seeking reversal of the Acting Regional Director's Report and Findings on Objections to the election held in the above-named case, alleging that three written statements contained in leaflets prepared and distributed to unit employees by the Intervenor (IAM) had improperly affected the results of the election.

The Acting Regional Director determined that all three of NAGE's objections were without merit, concluding the IAM's statements did not constitute conduct which improperly affected the results of the election. With regard to the first two objections, the Acting Regional Director, citing the Authority's decision in U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 6 FLRA No. 9 (1981), found that the statements contained in the leaflets which are the subject of these objections constituted an erroneous assessment of the current state of the law as to what would happen to the employees' established conditions of employment if IAM were replaced as the exclusive representative of the bargaining unit. However, he concluded, inter alia, that NAGE had sufficient time to reply to the leaflets but failed to do so. The Authority agrees that these objections do not set forth a basis upon which to set aside the election, noting particularly that NAGE had sufficient time to adequately respond to these statements but failed to do so. Further, with regard to the second objection, it is the Authority's view that IAM's statements could reasonably be interpreted by the employees as nothing more than campaign puffery concerning the effectiveness of IAM's representation in the past as contrasted with the uncertainties of NAGE's representational efforts in the future.

The Authority further agrees with the Acting Regional Director that NAGE's third objection does not constitute a basis for setting aside the election, since NAGE had sufficient time to rebut and did in fact reply to the alleged misstatement of fact contained in IAM's leaflet concerning NAGE's internal financial arrangements.

Accordingly, the request for review, seeking reversal of the Acting Regional Director's Report and Findings on Objections, is hereby denied, and the Regional Director is directed to take further appropriate action consistent with this decision. Issued, Washington, D.C., April 21, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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