American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923 and Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration (Authority decision, April 22, 1983)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority resolved the union's negotiability petition. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review of this final order in an appropriate United States court of appeals within 60 days after issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a). A petition does not itself stay the order.

Plain-English summary

A union proposed performance protections for SSA employees who contacted claimants directly. One proposal would exclude time waiting for a telephone from productivity measures; another would give trainees extra time to learn the procedures. The Authority found that both would change the quantity and timeliness standards used to evaluate work. It held them outside the duty to bargain under management's rights to direct employees and assign work, and dismissed the petition.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Management rights under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7106(a)(2)(A) and 7106(a)(2)(B).
• Outcome: Agency's nonnegotiability position sustained; both proposals dismissed on the merits.
• Key point: Time allowances embedded in productivity measures would change performance standards.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v12 p17 ]

12:0017(6)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

12 FLRA No. 6

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1923
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Agency

Case No. O-NG-452

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES

The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and presents issues relating to the negotiability of the following two Union proposals concerned with Agency's "direct contact program."

Union Proposal 1

Each employee working under the direct contact program shall be provided the proper materials and equipment to perform his/her duties. Time lost due to unavailability of telephones or other needed facilities will not be charged to productive time, nor result in adverse impact on performance evaluations or employee conduct.

Union Proposal 2

Employees will be expected to use direct contact procedures consistent with his/her level of development in the career ladder. Trainees in the first 2 steps of career ladders will be given time allowances to learn and implement direct contact procedures.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations. According to the Agency's uncontroverted description, the "direct contact program" addressed in the Union proposals involves direct contact by reviewing office employees with social security claimants when additional information is required to adjudicate claims. Under this program, the reviewing employee first attempts to reach the claimant by the telephone. If the claimant cannot be reached by telephone, or if, for any reason, a telephone is not immediately available to the reviewer, he or she is required to use direct mail contact instead.

Union Proposal 1, however, would permit an employee to choose to wait for a telephone to become available instead of using direct mail contact without having such waiting time count in a determination of the quantity or timeliness of the employee's work product.

Similarly, by requiring the Agency to provide certain trainees with "time allowances" in order "to learn and implement" the direct contact procedures, Union Proposal 2 would obligate the Agency, in effect, to grant extra time or not to count certain time in a determination of the quantity and timeliness of the employee's work product.

Therefore, as these two proposals would require negotiation of the content of performance standards, here the quantity and timeliness of the employee's work product, they interfere with management's section 7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) rights "to direct" employees and to "assign work" and are outside the duty to bargain. National Treasury Employees Union and Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt, 3 FLRA 769 (1980), affirmed sub. nom. National Treasury Employees Union v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 691 F.2d 553 (D.C. Cir. 1982).

Accordingly, for the reasons stated, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., April 22, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY