NFFE Local 1505 and National Park Service, Roosevelt-Vanderbilt National Historic Site (Authority decision, January 7, 1982)

Roosevelt-Vanderbilt contract appeal (FLRA O-NG-143): Filing missed deadline

Decision type
Authority decision
Docket
O-NG-143
Decided
January 7, 1982
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Authority precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-06

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Authority precedent from 1982, 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 1982
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)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Authority resolving a negotiability appeal. 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 1505 appealed an agency-head disapproval of part of a negotiated agreement at the Roosevelt-Vanderbilt National Historic Site. The disapproval was served July 10, 1979, making July 25 the deadline for a negotiability petition under the Authority's 15-day rule. The union filed August 6. The Authority dismissed the petition as untimely without reaching the disapproved term's merits.

Decision snapshot

  • Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7105(a)(2)(E), 5 U.S.C. § 7114(c), 5 C.F.R. § 2424.3.
  • Outcome: Petition dismissed as untimely.
  • Key point: Agency-head disapproval started the 15-day negotiability appeal period.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v07 p608 ]

07:0608(93)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

7 FLRA No. 93

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1505
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
ROOSEVELT-VANDERBILT NATIONAL
HISTORICAL SITE, HYDE PARK,
NEW YORK
Agency

Case No. O-NG-143

ORDER DISMISSING NEGOTIABILITY APPEAL

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 RAISES A THRESHOLD PROCEDURAL QUESTION. MORE SPECIFICALLY, THE
AGENCY CLAIMS THAT THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IS NOT TIMELY. THE AUTHORITY
AGREES.

IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THE AGENCY HEAD'S DISAPPROVAL OF A
PROVISION IN A LOCALLY NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO A REVIEW UNDER
SECTION 7114(C) OF THE STATUTE IS AN ALLEGATION OF NONNEGOTIABILITY FOR
PURPOSES OF APPEAL TO THE AUTHORITY. SEE E.G., AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1052 AND UNITED STATES ARMY
ENGINEER CENTER, FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, 6 FLRA NO. 82(1981). FURTHER
IN THAT REGARD, THE SUBMISSION OF THE AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY HEAD FOR
THE AGENCY HEAD'S APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 7114(C) OF THE
STATUTE SERVES AS THE WRITTEN REQUEST FOR AN ALLEGATION OF
NONNEGOTIABILITY PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.3 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND
REGULATIONS. SEE ASSOCIATION OF CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, INC.,
PENNSYLVANIA STATE COUNCIL AND THE ADJUTANT GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF
MILITARY AFFAIRS, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 7 FLRA NO. 52(1981);
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO AND AIR FORCE
LOGISTICS COMMAND, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO, 5 FLRA NO. 15
(1981). THE AGENCY HEAD'S DISAPPROVAL WAS SERVED ON THE UNION ON JULY
10, 1979. THEREFORE, THE UNION'S PETITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN FILED NO
LATER THAN JULY 25, 1979, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2424.3 OF THE
AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. SINCE THE PETITION FOR REVIEW WAS
FILED ON AUGUST 6, 1979, IT IS NOT TIMELY.

ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND
REGULATIONS (CFR 2424.10(1981)), IT IS ORDERED THAT THE PETITION FOR
REVIEW BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JANUARY 7, 1982

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

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