National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 15 and U.S. Department of the Army, Army Armament Munitions and Chemical Command (Authority decision, March 26, 1985)

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

NFFE Local 15 proposed time limits for grieving denials of within-grade increases. The Army command declared the proposals nonnegotiable, and the union filed a petition for Authority review. The agency then withdrew its allegation of nonnegotiability. With no remaining dispute about whether the proposals were within the duty to bargain, the Authority dismissed the petition without deciding the proposals' merits.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Negotiability review under 5 U.S.C. § 7105(a)(2)(E).
• Outcome: Petition dismissed after the agency withdrew its nonnegotiability allegation.
• Key point: The Authority did not decide negotiability because the agency withdrew the contested allegation.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v17 p325 ]

17:0325(47)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

17 FLRA No. 47

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 15
Union

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
ARMY ARMAMENT MUNITIONS AND
CHEMICAL COMMAND
Activity

Case No. O-NG-1107

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW

This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by the Union.

The record before the Authority in this case indicates that during the course of negotiations, the Union submitted proposals concerning the time limit for grieving the denial of a within grade increase under the negotiated grievance procedure. By letter dated February 6, 1985, the Activity declared the Union's proposals to be nonnegotiable. The Union then filed the instant petition for review with the Authority pursuant to section 2424.3 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, as to whether the disputed proposals were within the duty to bargain. Subsequently in a letter to the Authority dated March 7, 1985, the Agency withdrew the Activity's allegation of nonnegotiability.

Since the Agency has withdrawn the allegation of nonnegotiability concerning the Union's proposals, there is no longer an issue as to whether the proposals in this case are within the parties' duty to bargain under the Statute.

Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the petition for review in this case is hereby dismissed. For the Authority. Issued, Washington, D.C., March 26, 1985 Harold D. Kessler Managing Director for Case Processing