IFPTE Local 1 and Norfolk Naval Shipyard (Authority decision, July 28, 1982)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final Authority order. 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

IFPTE Local 1 filed a negotiability petition against Norfolk Naval Shipyard. The Authority identified a regulatory filing defect and gave the union time to correct it. The union made no submission by the deadline, so the Authority dismissed the petition without ruling on negotiability.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 C.F.R. § 2424.4(b).
• Outcome: Petition dismissed for uncorrected filing defects.
• Key point: The union did not complete its appeal after notice.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v09 p668 ]

09:0668(75)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

9 FLRA No. 75

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL
AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, LOCAL 1
(Union)

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NORFOLK NAVAL
SHIPYARD, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA
(Activity)

Case No. O-NG-660

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF
NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES FILED BY LOCAL 1 OF THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF
PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS (THE UNION) PURSUANT TO SECTION
7117(C)(2) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE AND
SECTIONS 2424.3 AND 2424.4 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. BY
AUTHORITY LETTER OF MAY 17, 1982, THE UNION WAS INFORMED THAT
PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION OF THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IN THE ABOVE-ENTITLED
CASE DISCLOSED A NUMBER OF APPARENT DEFICIENCIES IN MEETING CERTAIN
REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. SPECIFICALLY, AS
WAS NOTED IN THE AUTHORITY'S LETTER, THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW
FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2424.4(B).

THE UNION WAS ALSO ADVISED IN THE AUTHORITY'S LETTER THAT FURTHER
PROCESSING OF THE APPEAL WAS CONTINGENT UPON COMPLIANCE WITH THE
DESIGNATED PROVISIONS OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS. IN THIS REGARD,
THE UNION WAS INFORMED OF THE SPECIFIC ACTIONS THAT HAD TO BE TAKEN TO
COMPLY AND COMPLETE THE PETITION FOR REVIEW AND WAS AFFORDED TIME IN
WHICH TO TAKE THOSE ACTIONS. FINALLY, THE UNION WAS ADVISED THAT
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CITED REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT
PROVIDED COULD RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE PETITION FOR REVIEW.

THE UNION HAS MADE NO SUBMISSION WITH THE TIME LIMIT PROVIDED.
ACCORDINGLY, THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IS HEREBY DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 28, 1982

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR