Mare Island Shipyard and Federal Employees Metal Trades Council (Authority decision, August 5, 1982)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority resolving an unfair labor practice complaint under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. 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

Mare Island Shipyard and the union reached an impasse over which matters their negotiated grievance procedure would cover. The union alleged that the shipyard’s refusal to accept a full-scope procedure was an unfair labor practice. On a transferred record, the Authority held that the scope was a mandatory bargaining subject that could go through impasse procedures. It dismissed the complaint; there was no judge’s decision under review.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7121(a)(2).
• Outcome: Complaint dismissed on the merits.
• Key point: A party could bargain to impasse over grievance-procedure scope.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v09 p869 ]

09:0869(116)CA

The decision of the Authority follows:

9 FLRA No. 116

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
MARE ISLAND SHIPYARD,
VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA
Respondent

and

FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL
TRADES COUNCIL,
VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA
Charging Party

Case No. 9-CA-655

DECISION AND ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO THE REGIONAL
DIRECTOR'S "ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE AUTHORITY" IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 2429.1(A) OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.

UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING THE
STIPULATION OF ACTS AND THE PARTIES' CONTENTIONS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS:

THE AMENDED COMPLAINT ALLEGES THAT RESPONDENT VIOLATED SECTION
7116(A)(1), (5) AND (8) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE) WHEN IT REFUSED TO AGREE TO A FULL SCOPE
NEGOTIATED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE TO BE INCORPORATED IN ITS COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENT WITH THE CHARGING PARTY (THE UNION).

THE UNION IS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF CERTAIN WAGE GRADE
EMPLOYEES OF THE RESPONDENT. IN AUGUST 1978 THE PARTIES BEGAN
NEGOTIATIONS ON A NEW COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT. DURING THE
COURSE OF NEGOTIATIONS THE RESPONDENT PROPOSED THAT CERTAIN MATTERS BE
EXCLUDED FROM THE SCOPE OF THE NEGOTIATED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE. DESPITE
DISCUSSION AND EXCHANGES OF COUNTERPROPOSALS, THE PARTIES WERE UNABLE TO
REACH AGREEMENT ON THE SCOPE OF THE NEGOTIATED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AND
REACHED IMPASSE ON THE SUBJECT.

THE POSITIONS OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND CHARGING PARTY ARE
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO THOSE POSITIONS TAKEN IN VERMONT AIR NATIONAL
GUARD, BURLINGTON, VERMONT, 9 FLRA NO. 92(1982), WHEREIN WE HELD THAT
THE SCOPE OF THE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE IS A MANDATORY SUBJECT FOR
BARGAINING AND, IF IMPASSE IS REACHED, IS SUBJECT TO IMPASSE RESOLUTION
PROCEDURES. BASED ON THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THAT DECISION, THE
AUTHORITY FINDS THAT RESPONDENT'S ACTIONS HEREIN DID NOT VIOLATE THE
STATUTE AS ALLEGED IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE COMPLAINT IN CASE NO. 9-CA-655 BE, AND
IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., AUGUST 5, 1982

RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY