Federal Union of Scientists and Engineers, National Association of Government Employees, Local R1-144 (Union) and Department of the Navy (Activity) (Authority decision, June 3, 1981)

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

A union wanted to bargain over the effects on employees of supervisors’ alcohol and drug abuse training. It filed a negotiability appeal without specific proposed language. The Authority found the matter too undefined for review and dismissed the petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7117.
• Outcome: Negotiability appeal dismissed for lack of a specific proposal.
• Key point: A concrete proposal was needed for negotiability review.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v06 p14 ]

06:0014(6)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

6 FLRA No. 6

FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND
ENGINEERS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R1-144
(Union)

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
(Activity)

Case No. O-NG-431

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

ON FEBRUARY 9, 1981, THE FEDERAL UNION OF SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (THE UNION) FILED A
PETITION FOR REVIEW WITH THE AUTHORITY IN THE ABOVE-ENTITLED CASE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.1 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5
C.F.R. 2424.1(1980)) AND SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7101 ET SEQ.). FOR THE
REASONS INDICATED BELOW, THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW MUST BE
DISMISSED.

AS PRESENTED IN THE UNION'S APPEAL, THE ESSENCE OF THE PARTIES
DISPUTE INVOLVES THE UNION'S REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE THE IMPACT ON
REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES OF THE ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE TRAINING BEING
PROVIDED TO SUPERVISORS. IT APPEARS, HOWEVER, THAT THE UNION HAS NOT
PROPOSED SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR NEGOTIATION. WITHOUT SUCH LANGUAGE, IT
IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE THE CONSISTENCY OF A PROPOSAL WITH LAWS,
REGULATIONS OR THE STATUTE. THUS, THE INSTANT MATTER IN DISPUTE IS NOT
SUFFICIENTLY DELINEATED SUCH AS TO PROVIDE A BASIS FOR A NEGOTIABILITY
DETERMINATION. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS WELL ESTABLISHED THAT A PETITION
FOR REVIEW OF A NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE WHICH DOES NOT PRESENT A PROPOSAL
SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND DELIMITED IN FORM AND CONTENT AS TO PERMIT THE
AUTHORITY TO RENDER A NEGOTIABILITY DECISION THEREON DOES NOT MEET THE
CONDITIONS FOR REVIEW SET FORTH IN SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE AND
SECTION 2424.1 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS, ALABAMA ACT AND STATE OF ALABAMA NATIONAL GUARD,
CASE NO. O-NG-27, 2 FLRA NO. 39(1979).

IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE PROPOSAL IS NOT SUFFICIENTLY SPECIFIC AND
DELIMITED IN FORM AND CONTENT AT THIS TIME TO PERMIT THE AUTHORITY TO
RENDER A NEGOTIABILITY DECISION.

ACCORDINGLY, FOR THE REASONS STATED HEREIN, AND APART FROM OTHER
CONSIDERATIONS,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE INSTANT APPEAL BE, AND IT HEREBY IS,
DISMISSED.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JUNE 3, 1981

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR