American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1917, AFL-CIO (Union) and United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service (Agency) (Authority decision, September 11, 1980)

Final FLRA decision. This negotiability order ends the petition before the Authority. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review in a court of appeals within 60 days of issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a).

Plain-English summary

A union sought local bargaining over safety proposals for Immigration and Naturalization Service employees. The agency asserted that the proposals conflicted with the national master agreement. The Authority held that the parties first had to resolve what that agreement permitted through their chosen contract process. It denied the appeal without prejudice to a later negotiability petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7117.
• Outcome: Appeal denied without prejudice; proposal merits not reached.
• Key point: The master agreement dispute had to be resolved before a negotiability ruling.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v04 p182 ]

04:0182(29)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

4 FLRA No. 29

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1917
Union

and

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE
Agency

Case No. O-NG-227

DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY APPEAL

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) (5 U.S.C. 7101 ET
SEQ.).

THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY SHOWS THAT DURING NEGOTIATIONS FOR A
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNION AND THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, NEW YORK
DISTRICT OFFICE (ACTIVITY), THE UNION REQUESTED NEGOTIATIONS ON THE
FOLLOWING MATTERS:

PROPOSAL 1C TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF EMPLOYEES, THE
EMPLOYEES SHALL BE PLACED IN A SEGREGATED AREA SEPARATE FROM THE GENERAL
FACILITY POPULATION.

PROPOSAL 2C TO PROTECT HIS/HER HEALTH, NO DETENTION OFFICER WILL BE
REQUIRED TO COME IN PERSONAL CONTACT WITH AN ALIEN UNTIL SUCH ALIEN HAS
PASSED AN EXAMINATION BY A PHYSICIAN.

PROPOSAL 4C ALL EMPLOYEES IN THE DISTRICT WHO MEET AND DEAL WITH THE
PUBLIC ON A DAILY BASIS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH COMPLETE MEDICAL CHECKUPS
ON A TWICE-YEARLY BASIS.

THE ACTIVITY RESPONDED IN WRITING TO THE UNION'S REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE
ON THESE MATTERS, STATING, IN GENERAL, THAT THE AFOREMENTIONED PROPOSALS
"ARE IN CONFLICT" WITH THE MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES.
THEREAFTER, ON BEHALF OF THE UNION, THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (AFGE) FILED A PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE
AUTHORITY. THE AGENCY FILED A STATEMENT OF POSITION WITH THE AUTHORITY
ASSERTING, IN PERTINENT PART, THAT THE CONTROLLING EFFECT OF CERTAIN
PROVISIONS OF THE PARTIES' MASTER AGREEMENT MAKE, INTER ALIA, THE
PETITION FOR REVIEW HEREIN PREMATURE. MORE SPECIFICALLY, IN THE
AGENCY'S VIEW, A NUMBER OF PROVISIONS OF THE PARTIES' MASTER AGREEMENT,
INCLUDING ARTICLE 17, SECTION A, AND ARTICLE 34, SECTIONS B AND D (SEE
APPENDIX), RAISE ISSUES AS TO WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSALS ARE
CONTROLLED BY THE MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. AFGE DID NOT
FILE A RESPONSE TO THE AGENCY'S STATEMENT OF POSITION.

AS INDICATED ABOVE, THE PARTIES ARE ESSENTIALLY IN DISPUTE CONCERNING
THE THRESHOLD QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE MASTER AGREEMENT, NEGOTIATED AT
THE NATIONAL LEVEL, AUTHORIZES BARGAINING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL ON CERTAIN
MATTERS CONTAINED THEREIN. IN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1661 AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF
PRISONS, FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, DANBURY, CONNECTICUT, 2 FLRA
NO. 56(1980), THE AUTHORITY DECIDED, WITH RESPECT TO A QUESTION
SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL TO THAT PRESENTED HERE, THAT THE PROPER FORUM IN
WHICH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES OVER THE MEANING OF PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN
THE MASTER AGREEMENT WOULD BE THAT WHICH THE PARTIES THEMSELVES HAVE
ADOPTED FOR SUCH PURPOSE. FOR THE REASONS FULLY SET FORTH IN THAT
DECISION, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THE INSTANT PETITION IS NOT APPROPRIATE
FOR RESOLUTION UNDER THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN SECTION 7117 OF THE
STATUTE AND PART 2424 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR
2424.1 ET SEQ.).

ACCORDINGLY, AND APART FROM OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, THE UNION'S APPEAL
IS HEREBY DENIED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE RENEWAL OF ITS CONTENTION
THAT THE MATTERS IN DISPUTE ARE NEGOTIABLE UNDER THE STATUTE IN A
PETITION DULY FILED WITH THE AUTHORITY AFTER IT IS RESOLVED, UNDER
APPLICABLE PROCEDURES, THAT BARGAINING ON SUCH MATTERS IS NOT PRECLUDED
BY THE CONTROLLING AGREEMENT.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPTEMBER 11, 1980

RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN

HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER

LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

APPENDIX

ARTICLE 17, SECTION A THE SERVICE AGREES TO PROVIDE SAFE AND
HEALTHFUL WORKING CONDITIONS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE MISSION OF THE
SERVICE AND THE INHERENT HAZARDS OF THE JOB PERFORMED. THE PARTIES
SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE SAFETY AND HEALTH REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN
CHAPTER 227 OF THE I&NS ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL AND THE AGREEMENT.

ARTICLE 34, SECTION B IT IS UNDERSTOOD BY THE PARTIES TO THIS
AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS THE MASTER AGREEMENT AND ONLY A SUPPLEMENTAL
AGREEMENT MAY BE NEGOTIATED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. THE MASTER AGREEMENT IS
GOVERNING AND CONTROLLING AND NOTHING MAY BE INCLUDED IN THE LOCAL
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WHICH IS IN CONFLICT WITH THIS AGREEMENT. THE
RIGHTS CLAUSES APPLY TO ALL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS NEGOTIATED. WHERE
PROVISIONS OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT ARE IN CONFLICT WITH THE TERMS OF
THE MASTER AGREEMENT, THE TERMS OF THE MASTER AGREEMENT SHALL GOVERN.
IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD THAT THE LOCAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS SHALL
NOT REPEAT OR PARAPHRASE ANY PROVISIONS OF THIS MASTER AGREEMENT.

ARTICLE 34, SECTION D IF A NEGOTIABILITY DISPUTE INVOLVES A QUESTION
SOLELY AS TO WHETHER A PROPOSAL CONFLICTS, REPEATS, OR PARAPHRASES
PROVISIONS OF THE MASTER AGREEMENT, IT MAY BE REFERRED BY EITHER PARTY
TO BOTH THE CENTRAL OFFICE AND THE NATIONAL AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. THE PARTIES WILL DISCUSS SUCH A REFERRAL WITHIN
TEN (10) WORKING DAYS TO ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. IF SUCH IS NOT
RESOLVED, IT MAY BE PRESENTED AS A UNION GRIEVANCE STEP III OF THE
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AS A DISPUTE OVER INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF
THE MASTER AGREEMENT.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

COPIES OF THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
AUTHORITY IN THE SUBJECT PROCEEDING HAVE THIS DAY BEEN MAILED TO THE
PARTIES LISTED:

WILLIAM C. OWEN

ACTING CHIEF, LABOR MANAGEMENT

RELATIONS GROUP, JMD/PTS,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530

SHELLY DORN, PRESIDENT

AFGE LOCAL 1917

P.O. BOX 684, CHURCH STREET STATION

NEW YORK, NEW YORK

RONALD D. KING, DIRECTOR

CONTRACT AND APPEALS DIVISION,

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,

AFL-CIO

1325 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005

AUSTIN ROSS, CHIEF

LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS GROUP

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, PTS

CONSTITUTION AVE., AND 10TH STREET, N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530