National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 943 and Department of the Air Force, Technical Training Center, Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi (Authority decision, June 7, 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

The union proposed a joint labor management committee to set ranking factors for promotions in the Air Force technical training school. The Authority found that the committee would choose selection factors and their relative weight in the promotion process. That would directly interfere with management's statutory right to select employees. It dismissed the petition because the proposal was outside the duty to bargain.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Management selection right under 5 U.S.C. § 7106(a)(2)(C).
• Outcome: Nonnegotiability determination sustained; petition dismissed on the merits.
• Key point: A joint panel may not control the selection factors and weights used for promotions.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v12 p172 ]

12:0172(41)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

12 FLRA No. 41

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 943
Union

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
TECHNICAL TRAINING CENTER
KESSLER AIR FORCE BASE, MISSISSIPPI
Agency

Case No. O-NG-556

DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE

This case comes before the Federal Labor Relations Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute) and raises the question of the negotiability of the following Union proposal:

Section 1. It is the desire of both management and the Union that a viable promotion evaluation pattern hereinafter called PEP, exist for the mutual benefit of both management and labor. To assure that a viable PEP exists, a Joint Union/Management PEP Committee shall be established to study, make ground rules, and procedures for fulfilling the functions of establishing standards and guidelines in regards to the primary ranking factors relating to the PEP for promotion of GS-9 to GS-11, GS-11 to GS-12, and GS-12 to GS-13 in the 1712 series in the Technical Training School. This committee shall consist of 11 members, one of whom shall serve as chairman. Five of the members shall be selected by the employer and five of the members shall be selected by the Union. The non-voting chairman shall be selected by the Union. Actions of the committee will be forwarded to the COP for authentication for conformance with applicable laws and establishment of implementation procedures. Technical advisors without vote can be selected and used by management and/or the Union.

Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the contentions of the parties, the Authority makes the following determinations. The proposal provides for a joint labor-management committee to develop a promotion evaluation pattern (PEP) to establish standards and guidelines with regard to primary ranking factors to be used in evaluating candidates for promotions to certain positions. /1/ Specifically, according to the Union's statement of intent, under the proposal "the PEP committee (has the) authority to determine which factors shall be considered for promotion . . . and the relative weight to be assigned to each factor."

In thus providing for a joint committee to develop a "promotion evaluation plan" including determining the selective factors, i.e., the knowledge, skill and ability necessary to successful performance of the work of a position, to be used in merit promotion, the instant proposal would involve the Union in the Agency's selection process. Hence, it is materially to the same effect as Proposals 1 and 2 in National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1497 and Headquarters, Lowry Technical Training Center (ATC), Lowry Air Force Base, Colorado, 11 FLRA No. 92 (1983). In that case, the Authority held that the proposals involved, which established a joint labor-management panel to develop "promotion evaluation patterns," including designation of "selective factors," were outside the duty to bargain because they directly interfered with management's rights under section 7106(a)(2)(C) of the Statute by involving the union in the agency's selection process. Based on Lowry Technical Training Center and for the reasons stated therein, it is concluded that the instant proposal would also directly interfere with management's rights under section 7106(a)(2)(C) of the Statute.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations (5 CFR 2424.10), IT IS ORDERED that the petition for review be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., June 7, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------

/1/ A brief summary of the relevant aspects of merit promotion procedures and of their use in the selection of candidates for appointment to vacant positions is to be found in National Treasury Employees Union and NTEU Chapters 153, 161 and 183 and U.S. Customs Service, Region II, 11 FLRA No. 47 (1983). For a more detailed discussion of such procedures, see Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) Supplement 335-1, Appendix B, which distinguishes between "selective factors" and "crediting plans."