United States Small Business Administration, Lower Rio Grande Valley District Office and AFGE Local 3904 (Authority decision, October 2, 1984)

SBA Lower Rio Grande Valley and AFGE Local 3904 (FLRA 6-RO-90): Temporary workers' ballots to be counted

Decision type
Authority decision
Docket
6-RO-90
Decided
October 2, 1984
Outcome
Other
Precedential status
Citable Authority precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-05

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Authority precedent from 1984, 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 1984
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 resolves challenged ballots and directs the Regional Director to issue a revised tally. The election process remains unfinished. The decision includes an appropriate unit determination under 5 U.S.C. § 7112, which 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(2) excludes from court of appeals review.

Plain-English summary

The Small Business Administration challenged nine ballots cast by temporary disaster employees in a representation election. An Administrative Law Judge recommended counting them because the employees had a reasonable expectation of continued work and shared working conditions with other employees in the proposed unit. The Authority adopted that recommendation, noting that many temporary employees had already served longer than their initial six month appointments and some performed the same work as unit employees. It ordered the ballots opened and counted, with a revised tally to follow. The outcome is marked other because this decision adopts a Judge's ballot recommendation rather than reviewing a Regional Director's merits decision.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: Representation election under 5 U.S.C. § 7111; appropriate unit determination under § 7112.
  • Outcome: Challenges overruled; nine temporary employees' ballots ordered counted.
  • Key point: Continued employment prospects and shared working conditions supported including the temporary employees in the proposed unit.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v16 p180 ]

16:0180(29)RO

The decision of the Authority follows:

16 FLRA No. 29

UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DISTRICT OFFICE Activity

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 3904
Labor Organization/Petitioner

Case No. 6-RO-90

DECISION ON CHALLENGED BALLOTS

The Administrative Law Judge, in the above-entitled proceeding, issued his Decision recommending that the challenges to the ballots of nine temporary disaster employees (TDEs) be overruled and that their ballots be counted. The Activity filed original and amended exceptions to the Judge's Decision. /1/

Pursuant to section 2422.21(i) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7111 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), the Authority has reviewed the rulings of the Judge made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon consideration of the Judge's Decision and the entire record, the Authority hereby adopts the Judge's findings, conclusions and recommendation that the challenges be overruled.

In agreement with the Judge, the Authority concludes that TDEs engaged in servicing work have a reasonable expectancy of continued employment beyond their initial six month appointment. Particularly noted in this regard is the Judge's finding that at the time of the election two-thirds of the TDEs in Harlingen and Corpus Christi had served longer than six months under renewed appointments. Further, the Authority agrees with the Judge that the TDEs have a clear and identifiable community of interest with the other employees in the petitioned for unit and that the inclusion of the TDEs in the petitioned for unit will promote effective dealings with, and efficiency of the operations of, the Activity. In this regard, the Authority notes especially that the TDEs share the same general supervision, work schedules, office conditions and common working environment with other bargaining unit employees; that they have regular and frequent contacts with other unit employees; and that some of the TDEs perform substantially the same duties as other clerical workers and loan servicing specialists and assistants who are in the unit.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the ballots of Benavides, Louis R., GS 11, Disaster Loan Specialist, (temporary) Espino, Ernest, GS 7, Loan Service Assistant, (temporary) De Los Santos, GS 7, Loan Service Assistant, (temporary) Soto, Tovert, GS 5, Field Collection Clerk, (temporary) Reyes, Carole, GS 5, Field Collection Clerk, (temporary) Martinez, Jesus, GS 5, Field Collection Clerk, (temporary) Aldape, Millie, GS 4, Clerk-Typist, (temporary) Cardona, Effie, GS 3, Clerk-Typist, (temporary) Perez, Amelia M., GS 3, Clerk-Typist, (temporary be opened and counted at a time and place to be determined by the Regional Director. The Regional Director shall have a Revised Tally of Ballots served on the parties, and take such additional steps as are required by the Authority's Rules and Regulations. Issued, Washington, D.C., October 2, 1984 Henry B. Frazier III, Acting Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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

/1/ The Activity was not served with a copy of the Petitioner's post hearing brief to the Administrative Law Judge and requested the opportunity to amend its exceptions to respond to any issue raised therein which had not been covered in its original exceptions. Thereafter, the Activity was served a copy of the brief and its request was granted. The Activity's subsequently submitted amended exceptions have been duly considered.

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