Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO (Union) and Department of the Navy, Navy Public Works Center, Norfolk, Virginia (Activity) (Authority decision, July 16, 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 Norfolk Navy union sought review of an agency claim that it did not have to bargain over a basic workweek and hours proposal. The agency later withdrew that nonnegotiability allegation. The Authority found the dispute moot and dismissed the petition without a negotiability ruling.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7106(b)(1), 5 U.S.C. § 7117(a)(2).
• Outcome: Negotiability petition dismissed after the agency withdrew its allegation.
• Key point: No negotiability dispute remained after withdrawal of the agency’s claim.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v06 p291 ]

06:0291(53)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

6 FLRA No. 53

TIDEWATER VIRGINIA FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL
TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO
(Union)

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER,
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
(Activity)

Case No. O-NG-482

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW

THIS MATTER COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
PURSUANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7101 ET SEQ. (SUPP. III
(1979)).

THE RECORD IN THIS CASE INDICATES THAT DURING NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN
THE ACTIVITY AND THE UNION, THE ACTIVITY ALLEGED, IN EFFECT, THAT,
CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF 5 U.S.C. 7106(B)(1), IT ELECTED NOT TO
BARGAIN ON THE UNION PROPOSAL CONCERNING BASIC WORKWEEK AND HOURS OF
WORK. THE UNION SOUGHT THE AUTHORITY'S DETERMINATION OF THE
NEGOTIABILITY OF THE ISSUE PURSUANT TO SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE
AND SECTION 2424.11 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES OF PROCEDURE (5 C.F.R.
2424.11(1980)). SUBSEQUENTLY, IN ITS STATEMENT FILED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 2424.6 OF THE RULES, THE AGENCY WITHDREW THE ACTIVITY'S
ALLEGATION OF NONNEGOTIABILITY.

SINCE THE AGENCY HAS WITHDRAWN THE ALLEGATION CONCERNING THE UNION'S
PROPOSAL, THERE IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE AS TO WHETHER THE PROPOSAL IN THIS
CASE IS WITHIN THE PARTIES' DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER THE STATUTE. THE
DISPUTE INVOLVED IN THE UNION'S APPEAL THEREFORE HAS BEEN RENDERED MOOT.
ACCORDINGLY,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW HEREIN BE,
AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 16, 1981

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR