NAGE Local R5-168 and Fort Polk (Authority decision, August 12, 1985)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority on a negotiability petition. 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

The union proposed language about access to Fort Polk recreation facilities. The Authority found that access to these facilities did not directly concern bargaining unit conditions of employment, even though the Army regulated it. It dismissed the negotiability petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Conditions of employment definition under 5 U.S.C. § 7103(a)(14).
• Outcome: Proposal outside the duty to bargain; petition dismissed.
• Key point: Recreation facility access was not a direct condition of employment here.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v19 p552 ]

19:0552(75)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

19 FLRA No. 75

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL R5-168
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
HEADQUARTERS 5th INFANTRY
DIVISION AND FORT POLK, LOUISIANA
Agency

Case No. O-NG-1010

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE

The petition for review in this case comes before the Federal Labor Relations Authority (the Authority) pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), and presents an issue concerning the negotiability of the following Union proposal:

Pursuant to Army regulations civilian employees may use Morale Support Activities Facilities on a space available basis.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determination. The Union's proposal concerns civilian employee use of the Agency's recreational facilities as provided for by Army regulations. /1/

In this regard, the duty to bargain under the Statute extends only to "conditions of employment," i.e., personnel policies, practices, and matters affecting working conditions. /2/ In construing that statutory phrase, the Authority has found proposals which concern matters directly affecting "the work situation and employment relationship" of bargaining unit employees to be within the duty to bargain. E.g., National Treasury Employees Union and Internal Revenue Service, 3 FLRA 693 (1980). See also American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO and Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 2 FLRA 604, 606 (1980), enforced as to other matters sub nom. Department of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 659 F.2d 1140 (D.C. Cir. 1981), cert. denied sub nom. AFGE v. FLRA, 455 U.S. 945 (1982). Conversely, proposals which relate to activities of employees involved in non-work activities while in a non-duty status, such as proposals concerning employee access to agency recreation facilities, have been determined to be outside the duty to bargain because they do not concern matters which are conditions of employment. American Federation of Government Employees, Local 225 and U.S. Army Armament Research and Development Command, Dover, New Jersey, 11 FLRA 630 (1983); International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO, CLC, Local F-116 and Department of the Air Force, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, 7 FLRA 123 (1981).

The Union does not dispute that employee access to the subject recreation facilities in this case would relate to activities of employees involved in non-work activities while in a non-duty status. Rather, the Union contends that it "is not attempting to negotiate which if any facilities may be used by civilian employees, but, merely (to) advise unit employees that such facilities may be available and used as governed by Army regulations." /3/ As to such regulations, however, no claim is made that they implement an Agency policy requiring, as a precondition to the employment relationship itself, the provision of essential facilities and services so as to ensure reasonable standards of health decency for unit employees. /4/ Thus, the Agency having regulated access to its recreation facilities in this case does not alter the fact that based on U.S. Armament Research and Development Command and Vandenberg Air Force Base, matters related to such access do not directly affect conditions of employment of bargaining unit employees and are outside the duty to bargain.

Consequently, while the Union in this case may have intended only to inform employees of the existence of regulations governing employee access to Agency recreation facilities, adoption of the disputed proposal expressly concerns matters not directly related to conditions of employment of unit employees within the meaning of section 7103(a)(14) of the Statute and is outside the duty to bargain.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., August 12, 1985 Henry B. Frazier III, Acting Chairman William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

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

/1/ Army regulation AR 28-1 and Fort Polk Policy Issuance No. 85 provide that while the Agency's Morale Support Activities Facilities are primarily intended for use by military personnel, civilian employees may utilize these facilities in accordance with an established priority system on a space available basis.

/2/ Section 7103(a)(14).

/3/ Union Reply Brief at 2.

/4/ See National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1363 and Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Yongsan, Korea, 4 FLRA 139 (1980), enforced sub nom. Department of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 685 F.2d 641 (1982), (matter of ration control governed by regulation is a condition of employment of unit employees in overseas command since it is directly related to reasonable standards of health and decency for unit employees which the agency required as a precondition to their employment in an overseas command.)