International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 4 (Union) and Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire (Authority decision, July 15, 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 Portsmouth Navy shipyard union challenged a planned shutdown and the use of annual leave during it. The union had not proposed specific bargaining language. The Authority said the matter was too undefined for a negotiability ruling and dismissed the appeal.

Decision snapshot

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

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v06 p281 ]

06:0281(49)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

6 FLRA No. 49

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF
PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL
ENGINEERS, LOCAL 4
(Union)

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD
PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
(Activity)

Case No. O-NG-483

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

ON MAY 7, 1981, THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND
TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, LOCAL 4 (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 PLANNED SHUTDOWN OF THE SHIPYARD OVER CERTAIN TIME
PERIODS, AND THAT THE EMPLOYEES BE REQUIRED TO USE ANNUAL LEAVE TO COVER
THE SHUTDOWN PERIOD. HOWEVER, IT APPEARS THAT THE UNION HAS NOT
PROPOSED SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR NEGOTIATION. WITHOUT SUCH SPECIFIC
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., JULY 15, 1981

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR