Supplemental Digest and Index of

Published Decisions of the Assistant

Secretary of Labor for Labor-Manageme'ht

Relations Pursuant to Executive Order

11491, As Amended, July 1,1975

through June 30,1976

•U.S. Department of Labpr ■ •

U L.abor-Management Services Administration

Supplemental Digest and Index of

Published Decisions of the Assistant

Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management

Relations Pursuant to Executive Order

11491, As Amended, July 1,1975

through June 30,1976

U.S. Department of Labor 

W. J. Usery, Jr., Secretary

Labor-Management Services Administration 

Bernard E. DeLury

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management Relations

Office of Federal Labor-Management Relations 

Louis S. Wallerstein, Director

This edition covers the period of July 1,1975-June 30,1976.

It supplements two editions of the Digest and Index covering 

the period of January 1,1970-June 30,1975.

This edition contains a Table of Contents and 

Tables of Decisions and Reports on Rulings, each covering 

the period of July 1,1975-June 30,1976.

1976

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402-Price $2.75

Stock number 029-000-00270-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE ........................................................... xi

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................... xiii

DIGEST

05 00 00 GENERAL PROVISIONS ........................................... 1

05 04 00 Definitions ......................................... 1

05 08 00 Coverage of Executive Order ................. ....... 1

05 12 00 Evidence ............................................ 2

05 12 04 Request for LMSA Documents

and LMSA Personnel at Hearings .... 2

05 12 08 Admissibility at Hearings ........ ....... 3

05 16 00 Advisory Opinions .................... ...... 3

05 20 00 Concurrent Related Cases ............. ...... 3

05 24 00 Role of NLRB Decisions ............... ...... 3

05 28 00 Service .............................. ...... 3

05 32 00 Transitional Problems ................ ...... 3

05 36 00 Official Time ........................ ...... 3

10 00 00 REPRESENTATION CASES; PRELIMINARY STAGES ............. 6

10 04 00 Types of Petitions: Procedure .............. 6

10 04 04 Representation, Filed by Labor

Organization (RO) ................. 6

10 04 08 Agency Doubt as to Representative

Status (RA) ....................... 6

10 04 12 Decertification of Representative,

Filed by Employee(s) (DR) ....... 8

10 04 16 Clarification of Unit (CU) ........ 8

10 04 20 Amendment of Recognition or

Certification (AC) ................ 10

10 04 24 National Consultation Rights ..... 12

10 08 00 Posting of Notice of Petition ......... .... 12

10 12 00 Intervention ........................... .... 12

10 16 00 Showing of Interest .................... 12

10 20 00 Labor Organization Status .............. 13

10 24 00 Timeliness of Petition ................. ...o. 13

10 24 04 Election Bar ...................... 13

10 24 08 Certification Bar ................. 13

10 24 12 Agreement Bar ..................... 13

111
10 00 00 REPRESENTATION CASES; PRELIMINARY STAGES (Cont'd)

P ^

10 28 00 Status of Petitioner ....................... ......16

10 32 00 Qualifications to Represent Specified

Categories of Employees ..................... ......16

10 36 00 Request for Review Rights ................... ......16

10 40 00 Area Administrator's Action .......................16

10 44 00 Defunctness ....................................... 16

15 00 00 REPRESENTATION HEARING PROCEDURE ..................... ..... 19

15 04 00 Role of Hearing Officer .................... ..... 19

15 08 00 Motions ...................................... ..... 19

15 08 04 General ........................... ..... 19

15 08 08 Amendment of Petition ........... ..... 19

15 12 00 Evidence and Burden of Proof .................... 19

15 16 00 Unfair Labor Practice Allegations ......... ..... 19

15 20 00 Obligation of Parties ....................... ..... 20

15 24 00 Post-Hearing Submissions .................... ......20

15 28 00 Remand ...................................... ......20

20 00 00 REPRESENTATION UNIT DETERMINATIONS ................... ......23

20 04 00 Criteria ...........................................23

20 04 04 Community of Interest............ ......23

20 04 08 Effective Dealings .....................25

20 04 12 Efficiency of Operations ......... ......27

20 04 16 Agency Regulations and Parties'

Stipulations Not Binding on

Assistant Secretary .....................28

20 04 20 Previous Certification........... ......29

20 08 00 Geographic Scope ...................... ...........29

20 08 04 World-wide ........................ ......29

20 08 08 Nation-wide ....................... ......29

20 08 12 State-wide ........................ ......29

20 08 16 City-wide ........................ ......29

20 12 00 Organizational Scope ........................ ......29

20 12 04 Agency-wide....................... ......29

20 12 08 Activity-wide...........................30

20 12 12 Directorate-wide........................30

20 12 16 Command-wide............................31

20 12 20 Headquarters-wide.......................31

XV
20 00 00 REPRESENTATION UNIT DETERMINATIONS (Cont'd)

20 12 00 Organizational Scope (Cont'd)

Page

20 12 24 Field-wide ....................... ...... 32

20 12 28 Region-wide....................... ...... 32

20 12 32 Division-wide..................... ...... 33

20 12 36 Area-wide ....................... ...... 33

20 12 40 District-wide..................... ...... 34

20 12 44 Branch-wide....................... ...... 34

20 12 48 Base-wide ....................... ...... 34

20 12 52 Section-wide ..................... ...... 35

20 12 56 Multi-Installation................ ...... 35

20 12 60 Single Installation............... ...... 35

20 12 64 Occupational Classification...... ...... 35

20 16 00 Special Situations.......................... ...... 36

20 16 04 Severance......................... ...... 35

20 16 08 Accretion......................... ...... 36

20 16 12 Eligibility....................... ...... 38

20 16 16 Residual Employees................ ...... 38

20 16 20 Self-Determination...................... 39

20 16 24 Supervisory U n i t .................. ...... 39

20 16 28 Reorganization .................. ...... 39

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications .... ...... 41

20 24 00 Post-Decisional Intervention, Showing of

Interest and Withdrawal ..................... ...... 54

20 24 04 Posting of Notice of Unit

Determination ......... .......... ...... 54

20 24 08 Showing of Interest..................... 55

20 24 12 Opportunity to Withdraw.......... ...... 55

25 00 00 REPRESENTATION ELECTION AND POST ELECTION STAGES ..... 56

25 04 00 Voting Procedure ........................... .......56

25 04 04 Professionals..................... ...... 56

25 04 08 Self-Determination................ .......56

25 04 12 Role of Observers .......................56

25 04 16 Severance ........................ .......56

25 08 00 Objections .........................................56

25 08 04 Under EO 10988 .................... .......56

25 08 08 Procedure ........................ .......56

25 08 12 Timing of Objectionable Conduct ... 57

25 08 16 Agency Rules on Campaigning...... .......57

25 08 20 Campaign Communications.......... .......57

25 08 24 Promises of Benefit......................57

25 08 28 Conduct of Election......................57

25 08 32 Agency Neutrality........................57
25 00 00 REPRESENTATION ELECTION AND POST ELECTION STAGES

(Cont* d)

-------- Page

25 12 00 Challenges ..................................... 57

25 12 04 Eligibility of Employees............ 57

25 12 08 Questions Concerning Ballot......... 58

25 12 12. Timing of Challenge ................. 58

25 16 00 Certification .................................. 58

25 20 00 Clarification of Unit ........................ . 58

25 24 00 Amendment of Recognition or Certification..... 61

30 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; PROCEDURE ...................... 64

30 04 00 Requisites for Charges and Complaints ........ 64

30 08 00 Complaint Proceedings; Investigation Stage ,,, 64

30 12 00 Hearing ........................................ 64

30 12 04 Rulings of ALJs ..................... 64

30 12 08 Untimely Amendments to Complaints ... 65

30 12 12 Failure to Appear ................... 65

30 12 16 Prejudicial Evidence ................ 65

30 12 20 Technical Deficiencies............... 65

30 12 24 Evidence and Burden of Proof ....... 65

30 12 28 Lack of Cooperation ................. 65

30 16 00 Post-Hearing ................................... 65

30 20 00 Stipulated Record ............................. 65

30 24 00 Employee Status; Effect on Unfair Labor

Practxces ..................................... 66

30 28 00 Effect of Other Proceedings or Forums ........ 66

30 32 00 Major Policy Issue Raised ..................... 66

35 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; AGENCY ......................... 68

35 04 00 General ........................................ 68

35 04 04 Guidance or Directives of Civil

Service Commission or Agency ....... 68

35 04 08 Waiver of Rights Granted by

Executive Order ..................... 68

35 04 12 Management Rights ................... 68

35 08 00 Section 19(a)(1) .............................. 68

35 08 04 Interference ........................ 68

35 08 08 Distribution of Literature ......... 79

35 08 12 Solicitation ....................... 79

35 12 00 Section 19(a)(2) .............................. 79

35 16 00 Section 19(a)(3) .............................. 82

VI
35 20 00 Section 19(a)(4) ............................... 83

35 24 00 Section 19(a)(5) ............... • ............. 84

35 28 00 Section 19(a)(6) ............................... 87

35 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; AGENCY (Cont'd) Page

35 28 04 87

35 28 08 Failure to Meet and Confer

Generally 87

35 28 12 Failure to Meet and Confer on

Impact or Procedures ................ 90

35 28 16 Refusal to Allow Formal Dis91

35 28 20 93

35 28 24 94

35 28 28 Unilateral Changes in Terms

94

35 28 32 Bypassing Exclusive Representative 98

35 28 36 Refusal to Furnish Information ..... 99

35 32 00 Section 19(c) ....................................... 100

40 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; LABOR ORGANIZATION .................. 103

40 04 00 General ....................................... ..... 103

40 08 00 Section 19(b)(1) .............................. ..... 103

40 12 00 Section 19(b)(2) .............................. ..... 103

40 16 00 Section 19(b)(3) .............................. ..... 103

40 20 00 Section 19(b)(4) .............................. ..... 103

40 24 00 Section 19(b)(5) .............................. ..... 103

40 28 00 Section 19(b)(6) .............................. ..... 103

40 32 00 Section 19(c) ....................................... 103

45 00 00 REMEDIAL ORDERS AGAINST AGENCIES; UNFAIR LABOR

PRACTICES ................................................ ..... 105

45 04 00 Notification and Dissemination of Remedies .... 105

45 08 00 Advice of Compliance 105

45 10 00 Modifications to Orders ....................... .....105

45 12 00 Remedies for Improper Rules, Regulations

and Orders ......................................... 105

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct ................. ..... 105

45 16 04 Interference, Solicitation or

Distribution of Literature .......... 105

45 16 08 Discrimination 106

45 16 12 Assisting a Labor Organization .... 106

45 16 16 Refusal to Accord Appropriate

106

vii
r e m e d i a l o r d e r s a g a i n s t AGENCTE.Sr UNFAIR T Aror

PRACTICES (Cont'd) ----------

^5 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct (Cont'd^

Page

45 16 20 Failure to Consult, Confer or

/. „ Negotiate ...........................

Hj io 24 Failure to Cooperate ......

45 20 00 Jurisdictional Questions

109

109

00 00 REMEDIAL ORDERS AGAINST LABOR ORGANIZATIONS;

UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES

• 111

50 04 00 Notification and Dissemination of Remedies .... m

50 08 00 Advice of Compliance ........ iii

50 12 00 Remedies for Improper Rules, Regulations

DU ib uu Remedies for Improper Conduct .n 1A nn r'* .................. ................. ...... Ill

50 16 04 Interference ........................

50 16 08 Harassment of Employee in Performance of Duties .................. Ill

50 16 12 Inducing Management to Coerce an

Employee .............. ............. \\\

50 16 16 Strike Activity .................... H I

50 16 20 Discrimination ..................... 2.H

50 16 24 Failure to Consult, Confer or

Negotiate .......... ........ . Ill

50 16 28 Denial of Membership .... ............. m

55 00 00 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT 113

55 04 00 Effect on Representation and Unfair Labor

Practice Cases ................................

55 08 00 Procedure .......................................... H 3

55 08 04 Jurisdiction ........................ .... 113

55 08 08 Bill of Rights ..................... .... 113

55 08 12 Elections .......................... .... 113

55 12 00 Bill of Rights ................................ .... H 4

55 12 04 Equal Rights ........................ .....114

55 12 08 Freedom of Speech .......................114

55 12 12 Dues, Initiation Fees and

Assessments . o . o . . 114

55 12 16 Protection of the Right to Sue .... .....114

55 12 20 Safeguards against Improper

Disciplinary Action .....................114

Vlll
60 00 00 GRIEVABILITY AND ARBITRABILITY ..................... 116

60 04 00 General ................................... 116

60 08 00 13(a) ..................................... 116

60 12 00 13(b) ..................................... 116

60 16 00 13(d) ..................................... 116

TABLE OF DECISIONS - ALPHABETICAL LISTING .................... 118

TABLE OF DECISIONS - NUMERICAL LISTING, DATES

OF ISSUANCE AND SECTIONS OF DIGEST INVOLVED .................. 133

TABLE OF REPORTS ON RULINGS, DATES OF ISSUANCE

AND SECTIONS OF DIGEST INVOLVED .............................. ***

INDEX .......................................................... 151

Page

VwV* During this period, no Reports on Rulings of the Assistant Secretary

were issued.

IX

PREFACE

This edition of the Supplemental Digest and Index (SDI) contains digests

of all published decisions of the Assistant Secretary of Labor for LaborManagement Relations (A/S) pursuant to Executive Order 11491, from

July 1, 1975 to June 30, 1976. Published decisions from January 1, 1970

to June 30, 1975, are contained in two previously published editions of

the Digest and Index (DI).

The Digest section summarizes significant decisional material and is arranged in a functional classification under major headings and subheadings,

listed in the Table of Contents. It covers: (1) decisions after formal

hearing or stipulated record; (2) Reports on Rulings of the A/S on requests for review of field-level actions; and (3) those rulings of the

Federal Labor Relations Council which remanded cases to the A/S or

modified his decisions.

Executive Order 11491 was amended, effective May 7, 1975, and the Regulations of the A/S were revised, effective May 7, 1975. Accordingly,

careful attention should be given to the possible impact of the changes in

the Order or the Regulations on decisional material in cases filed prior

to such changes.

The full text of A/S decisions has been published in bound volumes entitled

"Decisions and Reports on Rulings of the Assistant Secretary of Labor for

Labor-Management Relations Pursuant to Executive Order 11491, as Amended."

Past decisions may also be read at any Area Office of the Labor-Management

Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor.

The SDI is intended as a guide to material in the A/S's published decisions

but should not be used as a substitute for the full text of such decisions,

nor should its contents be construed as official pronouncements or interpretations of the A/S.

xi

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

AA

AC Petition

AD

ALJ

AO

ARD

A/S

A/SLMR No.

CU Petition

DI

EO

FLRC

FLRC No.

GS

HE

HO

Area Administrator, Labor-Management Services

Administration, U.S. Department of Labor

(formerly Area Director, Labor-Management

Services Administration)

Amendment of Recognition or Certification

Petition

Area Director, Labor-Management Services

Administration; now referred to as Area Administrator,

Labor-Management Services Administration

Administrative Law Judge (formerly Hearing Examiner)

Area Office, Labor-Management Services Administration

Assistant Regional Director for Labor-Management

Services; now referred to as Regional Administrator,

Labor-Management Services Administration

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management

Relations

Assistant Secretary for Labor-Management Relations

Decision Number

Clarification of Unit Petition

Digest and Index of Published Decisions of the

Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management

Relations

Executive Order 10988 where indicated; otherwise

references are to Executive Order 11491 in cases

filed prior to 11-24-71, and to Executive Order

11491, as amended, subsequent thereto

Federal Labor Relations Council

Federal Labor Relations Council Decision Number

General Schedule

Hearing Examiner (Title changed to Administrative

Law Judge)

Hearing Officer

xiii
LMSA

LMWP

NE

OFLMR

RA

RA Petition

R A/S No.

Regs

SDI

Sec.

ULP

WB

Labor-Management Services Administration

Office of Labor-Management and Welfare-Pension

Reports

No entry for period covered

Office of Federal Labor-Management Relations,

Labor-Management Services Administration

Regional Administrator, Labor-Management

Services Administration (formerly

Assistant Regional Director for LaborManagement Services)

Agency Doubt as to Representative's Status

Petition

Report on Ruling of the Assistant Secretary

Number

Regulations of the Assistant Secretary of

Labor for Labor-Management Relations

Supplemental Digest and Index of Published

Decisions of the Assistant Secretary of

Labor for Labor-Management Relations

Section

Unfair Labor Practice

Wage Board

XIV
05 08 00

05 00 00 GENERAL PROVISIONS

05 04 00 Definitions (Alphabetically Listed)

(See also; 20 20 00, "Employees Categories and

Classifications")

Agency Management. A/S found Civil Service Commission

not to be "Agency Management" within the meaning of

Section 2(f) of the EO with respect to an Activity's

employees while it was conducting an evaluation of

those employees pursuant to law and EO (CSC, Washington,

D.C., A/SLMR No. 640; CSC, and IRS, Washington, D.C.,

A/SLMR No. 642)

05 08 00 Coverage of Executive Order

A working condition potentially affecting 50 out of

425 employees is sufficiently "general" to be included

within the meaning of Sec. 10(e). (Navy, Norfolk Naval

Shipyard, A/SLMR No. 548)

Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-54, A/S revised certain portions of the remedial order in A/SLMR No. 400 which

were inconsistent with FLRC finding that (1) Sec. 10(e)

does not impose upon a labor organization holding exclusive recognition an obligation to represent a bargaining unit employee in an adverse action proceeding until

such time as the employee indicates a desire to choose

his own representative; and (2 ) an agency's failure to

recognize a labor organization's status as an employee's

representative in an adverse action proceeding, until

the employee designates another representative, does

not constitute an unfair labor practice. (Naval Ordnance

Sta., Louisville, Ky., A/SLMR No. 588)

Due to lack of evidence, no finding made with respect

to Activity's contention that employees located outside United States should be exempt from the provisions

of the EO. (Army, Criminal Investigation Command,

Third Region, Ft, Gillem, Forest Park, Ga., A/SLMR No.

626)

No finding made with respect to Activity's contention

that employees should be exempt from the provisions

of the EO based on Section 3(b)(3) and (4), where

requisite statement from head of agency not submitted.

(Army, Criminal Investigation Command, Third Region,

Ft. Gillem, Forest Park, Ga., A/SLMR No. 626)

6-30-76
05 12 04

Disposition by A/S was pursuant to Section 6 (a)

(4) of EG, ULP procedure, and should not be construed as a determination of rights of access under

the Freedom of Information Act, (CSC, Washington,

D.C., A/SLMR No. 640)

Agency head's determination to exclude investigatory

employees of the Office of Investigation and the

auditors in the Office of Audit from coverage of EO

pursuant to Section 3(b)(4) on grounds that EO could

not be applied to such employees in manner consistent

with internal security of Agency was not arbitrary

or capricious. (Dept, of Agric,, Off. of Investigation and Off. of Audit, A/SLMR No. 643)

Agency head's determination to exclude investigatory

employees from coverage of EO pursuant to Section

3(b)(4) on grounds that EO could not be applied to

such employees in manner consistent with internal

security of Agency was not arbitrary or capricious

and accordingly, representation petition covering

requested employees dismissed. (Dept, of Agric,,

Off, of Investigation, Temple, Tex,, A/SLMR No. 644)

A/s found that Activity did not meet the definition

of "Agency" as defined in Section 2(a) of the Order

inasmuch as it could not be found to be a "Government

Corporation" and, therefore, does not come within

the jurisdiction of the EO, (Orange-Chatham Comprehensive Health Services, Inc., A/SLMR No, 650)

A/s adopted ALJ finding that the A/S did not have

jurisdiction to consider alleged Sec. 19(a)(1) and

(6 ) violation because Respondent's mere announced

intention to impose a change in duty hours could not

be equated with an actual implementation thereof

within the meaning of Section 11(d) of the EO.

Proper resolution of such a negotiability issue is

through the Sec. 11(c)(2) and (4) procedures of the

E0« Complaint dismissed. (Dept, of Agric., Grain

Div. Field Off., New Orleans, La., A/SLMR No. 666)

05 12 00 Evidence

05 12 04 Request for LMSA Documents and LMSA

Personnel at Hearings

05 08 00 Coverage of Executive Order (Cont'd)

No Entries I

6-30-76
05 36 00

05 12 08 Admissibility at Hearings

No Entries

05 16 00 Advisory Opinions

No Entries

05 20 00 Concurrent Related Cases

Complainant filed ULP's against both the

Civil Service Commission and the Internal

Revenue Service alleging that it was denied

the right to be present during interviews

conducted among unit employees because the

CSC used IRS personnel as part of the CSC

team conducting the personnel evaluation.

The A/S found no violation by either Respondent as the CSC was not "Agency Management" within the meaning of Sec. 2(f)

of the Order while conducting the evaluation pursuant to law and EG and the IRS

personnel on the CSC team was under CSC

supervision, (CSC, and IRS, Washington,

D.C., A/SLMR No, 642)

05 24 00 Role of NLRB Decisions

No Entries

05 28 00 Service

No Entries

05 32 00 Transitional Problems

No Entries

05 36 00 Official Time

Allowing employees to make judgments for

themselves as to whether they are necessary witnesses pursuant to Section 206,7

of the Regs would be disruptive of the

orderly processes required to implement

05 12 00 Evidence (Cont'd)

6-30-76
05 36 00

properly the EG, even if some of those

judgments ultimately were vindicated.

The A/s noted that the purposes of the

EG would be better served if the parties

adhered to the implicit mandate of Section

206.7 that prior approval of a "Request for

Appearance of Witnesses" be obtained before

any employee is granted such official time

and expenses as are described in Sec, 206.7(g)

of the Regs. (Bellingham Flight Service

Sta., FAA, Northwest Region, DOT, Bellingham, Wash. A/SLMR No. 597)

05 36 00 Official Time (Cont'd)

6-30-76

10 00 00 REPRESENTATION CASES; PRELIMINARY STAGES

10 04 00 Types of Positions; Procedure (For substantive

matters on petitions see; 20 00 00, "Representation Unit Determination"; 25 20 00, "Certification

of Unit"; and 25 24 00, "Amendment of Recognition or

Certification")

10 04 04 Representation, Filed by Labor OrganizatiSn (RO)----- ------------------- -----

Petitioner sought an election in a unit of

all nonprofessional employees of the Activity.

Unit sought was found not appropriate for the

purpose of exclusive recognition because the

claimed employees did not possess a clear and

identifiable community of interest separate

and distinct from the other Division employees.

It was noted particularly that (1) all of the

Branches operate under the centralized control

of the Division Director; (2) all Division

employees operate under the same uniform personnel procedures; and (3) the operation of

the Branches of the Divisions is highly integrated. (Dept, of Agric., Agric. Research

Service, Budget and Finance Division, Accounting Services Branch, New Orleans, La., A/SLMR

No. 579)

10 04 08 Agency Doubt as to Representative's Status

( ^ )

RA petition dismissed even though claimed

unit is co-extensive with the community of

interest among employees at an activity which

added the functions, physical facilities, and

some employees (exclusively represented by the

NAGE) of another activity which had been deactivated, Election pursuant to the RA petition not appropriate because employees exclusively represented by the NAGE at the deactivated activity are not now substantially

identifiable with any pre-existing units; these

employees had been integrated into a different

activity wherein employees had not been previously represented in an exclusively recognized unit. (U.S. Coast Guard Air Sta., NonAppropriated Fund Activity, Cape Cod, Mass.,

A/SLMR No. 561)

10 04 08

6-30-76
10 04 08

10 04 08 Agency Doubt as to Representative's

Status (RA) (Cont'd)

RA petition dismissed due to untimely filing.

Even if the RA petition had been timely filed,

it was not supported by evidence sufficient

to establish that the NFFE no longer continued to represent a majority of the employees in its unit where (I) the NFFE had

represented and continued to represent employees in the unit; and (2 ) a significant number

of employees continued on dues withholding.

(Nat'l. Park Service, A/SLMR No. 589)

In view of his decision that the units involved continued to exist after the reorganization, the A/S determined that treating the

petitions as CU petitions would not require a

contrary result, as suggested by the ActivityPetitioners. (Naval Aerospace and Regional

Medical Cntr., Pensacola Fla. and Naval Aerospace Medical Research Lab., Pensacola, Fla.

and Naval Aerospace Medical Inst., Pensacola,

Fla., A/SLMR No. 603)

A/S found that an Agency reorganization brought

about a substantial change in the character

and scope of the unit of the Activity which

supports a good faith doubt as to the appropriateness. As a result of the above, and the

fact that it was possible to trace a connec-*

tion to the new unit from previously existing

certified unit and that the newly formed unit

was appropriate for the purpose of exclusive

recognition, the A/S directed an election in

such unit. (Dept, of Interior, Bureau of

Reclamation, Arizona Projects Off., Phoenix,

Ariz., A/SLMR No. 614)

RA petition filed because ECOM, Ft. Monmouth,

New Jersey, claimed that after closure and

reductions-in-force actions there existed a

good faith doubt as to whether AFGE continued

to represent all nonprofessional, nonsupervisory employees at a Philadelphia operation

of the Activity. A/S adopted findings of ALJ,

who found that the AFGE unit in Philadelphia

ceased to exist as a distinct, separate and

6-30-76
10 04 16

10 04 08 Agency Doubt as to Representative's

Status (RA) (Cont'd)

identifiable unit when it was merged with

ECOM, Ft. Monmouth. RA petition dismissed.

(DOT, U.S. ECOM, Ft. Monmouth, A/SLMR No. 617)

Activity-wide unit found appropriate and

election directed where the Activity was, in

effect, a new organizational entity which included all or part of the employee complement

of a number of previously recognized units

whose scope and character had been changed by

the creation of the Activity. (Navy Public

Works Cntr., San Francisco Bay, A/SLMR No. 628)

RA petition dismissed where recognized unit was

no longer appropriate due to substantial changes

in both the scope and character of said unit

as the result of a reorganization, thus freeing

the Activity from the obligation of recognizing

the exclusive representative involved.

(Defense Contract Audit Agency, A/SLMR No. 657)

10 04 12 Decertification of Representative, Filed by

Employee(s) (DR)

No Entries

10 04 16 Clarification of Unit (CU)

Petition for clarification of unit dismissed

inasmuch as the purpose of a CU petition is

to clarify an existing, exclusively recognized

unit, while the employees in the unit claimed

in this CU petition are not currently represented

in an exclusively recognized unit. Unit claimed

contained employees who had been represented

by the NAGE previous to the deactivation of

the activity and the addition of its physical

facilities, functions, and some of its employees to another activity, but the A/S found

that these employees do not constitute a recognizable and viable unit by themselves at this

other activity, wherein employees had not been

6-30-76
10 OA 16

previously represented in an exclusively

recognized unit. (U.S. Coast Guard Air

Sta., Non-Appropriated Fund Activity, Cape

Cod, Mass., A/SLMR No. 561)

Activity's AC petition treated as CU and

AC petition, and NFFE's CU and AC petition

dismissed where A/S amended and clarified the

NFFE's unit to indicate (1) that some of

its employees had accreted to an IBPAT unit;

(2) that one subdivision of the Activity had

been abolished; and (3) that the name of the

Activity had been changed. (Nat'l. Park Service,

A/SLMR No. 589)

CU petition held appropriate in seeking to

change the unit description of a unit of all

nonsupervisory Wage Board (WB) employees to

include approximately 26 General Schedule

Engineering Technicians who were at one time

WB employees but, as a result of a competitive merit promotion action, had become General Schedule (GS) employees. (Air Force,

Aeronautical Systems Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio,

A/SLMR No. 590)

As a result of reorganization and abolishment of DCASD, Activity-Petitioner sought

to clarify status of approximately twentyfive employees who were physically and functionally transferred to another DGASD, to

show that they had become intermingled and

essentially indistinguishable from the bargaining unit employees of the new DCASD and,

therefore, should be included in the exclusively recognized unit. (Defense Contract

Administration Services Region (DCASR),

Philadelphia, A/SLMR No. 609)

Petition seeking to include in a certified

unit all professional and nonprofessional

employees of a newly established office was

dismissed inasmuch as the employment of 70

individuals needed to fulfill projected staffing requirements was speculative. Conse10 04 16 Clarification of Unit (CU) (Cont'd)

6-30-76
10 04 20

quently, the A/S found that it would not

effectuate the purposes and policies of

the Order to amend a certification and

clarify a unit where, as here, the employees

sought to be added to the certified unit had

not, in fact, been hired. (HEW, Social and

Rehabilitation Service, Central Off., Washington, D.C,, A/SLMR No. 632)

Reorganization which occured was primarily

administrative and did not so thoroughly

combine and integrate two separate units so

as to require a finding that one unit had

lost its independent identity. On this basis,

and in light of the fact that a disclaimer of

interest was filed for one of the units, the

CU petition was ordered dismissed and it was

concluded that the employees in the disclaimed

unit were presently unrepresented. (Ft.

McPherson, Ga., A/SLMR No . 655)

10 04 20 Amendment of Recognition or Certification

TacT

Activity's AC petition treated as CU and AC

petition, and NFFE's CU and AC petition dismissed where A/S amended and clarified the NFFE's

unit to indicate (1) that some of its employees had accreted to an IBPAT unit; (2) that

one subdivision of the Activity had been

abolished; and (3) that the name of the Activity had been changed. (Nat'l. Park Service,

A/SLMR No. 589)

A/C petition seeking to designate a change in

organizational title of Activity was granted

where parties had stipulated to the change in

organizational title and where there was no

evidence to indicate that such stipulation

was improper. (Air Force, Aeronautical Systems Division, Air Force Systems Command,

Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, A/SLMR No. 590)

A/C petition,seeking to amend recognition

of unit to include administratively trans10 04 16 Clarification of Unit (CU) (Cont'd)

6-30-76
10 04 20

10 04 20 Amendment of Recognition or Certification

(AC) (Cont'd)

ferred employees, granted where it was held

that the disputed employees continued to

share a clear and identifiable community of

interest with other unit employees represented

by the Petitioner. (AAFES, Ft. Benning Exchange, Ft. Benning, Ga., A/SLMR No. 592)

A/s dismissed AC petition as being inappropriately filed, as he found that a question concerning the appropriateness of the unit existed.

(Dept, of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation,

Arizona Projects Off., Phoenix, Ariz., A/SLMR

No. 614)

AC petitions dismissed where one unit involved

had been transferred entirely to a new organizational entity and no longer existed as a

separate viable unit, while the other unit,

from which only certain employees had been

transferred to the new organizational entity,

although diminished in scope, continued to exist

as a viable unit whose designation had not

changed. (Navy Public Works Cntr., San Francisco Bay, A/SLMR No. 628)

Petition seeking to include in a certified

unit all professional and nonprofessional employees of a newly established office was dismissed Inasmuch as the employment of 70 individuals needed to fulfill projected staffing

requirements was speculative. Consequently,

the A/S found that it would not effectuate the

purposes and policies of the Order to amend a

certification and clarify a unit where, as here,

the employees sought to be added to the certified unit had not, in fact, been hired. (HEW,

Social and Rehabilitation Service, Central Off.,

Washington, D.C., A/SLMR No. 632)

AC petition is not appropriate vehicle to reflect a redelegation of authority from the

Commander, Fifth U.S. Army to all United States

Army Reserve Command Commanders, who were

further ordered to designate a servicing CivilII 6-30-76
10 16 00

10 04 20 Amendment of Recognition or Certification

(AC) (Cont~^ ”

ian Personnel Office to act for them in

carrying out the civilian personnel program.

(Army, Ft. McCoy, Sparta, Wise., A/SLMR No.

638)

10 04 24 National Consultation Rights

Petition filed seeking National Consultation

Rights dismissed where the ALJ found, contrary

to Petitioner, that the Department of the Navy

was not an "Agency" within the meaning of the

EG and concluded that a component of the Navy

was neither an agency nor a primary national

subdivision of an agency within the meaning

of Sec. 2(a) of the EG and part 2412 of the

Council's Rules and Regulations. (Navy,

Military Sealift Command, A/SLMR No. 576)

10 08 00 Posting of Notice of Petition

(See 20 24 00 for Post-Decisional Items)

No Entries

10 12 00 Intervention

(See 20 24 00 for Post-Decisional Items)

Noting that a nationwide unit petition was filed untimely with respect to petitions pending in several

less comprehensive units within the nationwide unit

sought, the A/S denied intervention with regard to the

employees in those units and excluded them from any

election held in the unit found appropriate. (FAA and

FAA, Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

Intervenor, although served with Notice of Hearing,

failed to appear at hearing. Status as intervenor

denied by A/S in accordance with Sec, 202.5(a) of the

Regs, as amended May 7, 1975. (FAA, Nat'l, Cntr,,

Aviation Facilities Experimental Cntr., Atlantic

City, N.J., A/SLMR No. 606)

10 16 00 Showing of Interest

(See 20 24 00 for Post-Decisional Items)

ARD's prior determination with respect to showing of

6-30-76 12
10 24 12

13

interest not subject to attack at representation

hearing. (VA Cntr., Bath, N.Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

Had investigation of challenge to validity been

conducted and ruling made pursuant to Sec. 202.2

(f)(2) of the Regs, no election would have been

conducted. Therefore, Report No. 58 does not preclude consideration of objectionable conduct occurring

before petition was filed under circumstances of this

case, and election results are set aside. (Navy,

Navy Commissary Store Complex, Oakland, A/SLMR No.

654)

10 20 00 Labor Organization Status

No Entries

10 24 00 Timeliness of Petition

10 24 04 Election Bar

No Entries

10 24 08 Certification Bar

No Entries

10 24 12 Agreement Bar

(See also 10 44 00, "Defunctness")

An RA petition based on a good faith doubt

as to the continued majority status of an

incumbent exclusive representative in an

existing unit is subject to the timeliness

requirements of Sec. 202.3 of the Regs. Thus,

an RA petition of this kind, which was filed

within the insulated 90 day period provided

by Section 202.3(d) of the Regs, was found to

be untimely. (Denver Airway Facilities Hub

Sector, FAA, Rocky Mountain Region, DOT,

Aurora, Colo., A/SLMR No. 535)

Agreement covering all GS employees bars election for unit of civilian firefighters where

(1) evidence indicates that at least a small

number of civilian firefighters was employed

by the Activity a number of months or years

prior to the execution of the current agree10 16 00 Showing of Interest (Cont'd)

6-30-76
10 24 12

LO 24 12 Agreement Bar (cont*d')

ment and the filing of the petition; (2 )

civilian firefighters are serviced by the

same civilian personnel office as are other

unit employees; and (3) no evidence was presented that the parties to the agreement sought

or intended, at any time during their bargaining history, to exclude the civilian firefighter classification from the base-wide unit.

(Air Force, 31st Combat Support Group, Homestead AFB, Homestead, Fla., A/SLMR No. 549)

Petitioner's assertion that negotiated agreement could not act as a bar to its petition

because it was negotiated and signed by a

supervisor who was also the incumbent's president and chief negotiator rejected by A/S

because (1) such supervisory involvement was

alleged to have occurred more than six months

prior to the filing of the petition in the

case; and (2 ) the negotiated agreement involved was otherwise valid on its face.

(HEW, Public Health Service Indian Hosp.,

Claremore, Okla., A/SLMR No. 568)

RA petition alleging a good faith doubt that

the NFFE continued to represent a majority

of the employees in its unit dismissed where

(1) such petition was not filed during the

"open period" established by Section 202.3

(c)(1) of the Regs; (2) NFFE not defunct inasmuch as there had been at least one officer

of the NFFE at all times since its certification; (3) the NFFE national office had

taken affirmative action to represent unit

employees; and (4) there had been 58 members

on continuing dues withholding. (Nat'l, Park

Service, A/SLMR No. 589)

Petition filed untimely as employees in claimed

unit remained in exclusively recognized unit

after employees relocated to another base some

seven miles away. (Arizona Air Nat'l. Guard,

Phoenix, Ariz., A/SLMR No. 593)

Agreement initialed prior to filing of petition is an agreement bar where evidence established that (1) parties initialing had

authority to negotiate and execute a binding

6-30-76
10 24 12

agreement; (2 ) the initialed articles cOl'itained substantial and finalized terms and

conditions of employment sufficient to stabilize bargaining relationship; and (3) the

affixing of the parties' signatures after the

filing of the petition constituted a mere

formal execution of the previously agreed upon

provisions. (Navy, Navy Exchange, Miramar,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 602)

A/s found that no agreement bar existed where,

following reorganization, a new organizational

entity was created which was separate and distinct from Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, or

Headquarters, Fifth U.S. Army, and employees

were no longer part of any existing unit.

(U.S. Army Communications Command Agency, Ft.

Sam Houston, Tex., A/SLMR No. 604)

A/S found that Activity-Petitioner's RA petition

was not barred by the negotiated agreement

between the Activity and the labor organization

because the RA petition questioned the continued

appropriateness of the unit for which the labor

organization was certified. (Dept, of Interior,

Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Projects Off.,

Phoenix, Ariz., A/SLMR No. 614)

A/S found no agreement bar to representation petition where signatory to negotiated

agreement found to be defunct. (Navy, U.S.

Naval Sta. and Naval Amphibious Base, San Diego,

Cal. and Coronado, Cal., A/SLMR No. 627)

Petition found timely and neither an agreement

renewed on September 17, 1972 between the

Activity and Intervenor, nor a three-year agreement executed on June 5, 1974 constituted an

agreement bar. A/S found that as the renewed

agreement did not comply with Sec. 13 of the

Order it could not serve as a bar to a petition

but such agreement, if otherwise valid, would

be binding on the parties thereto. (VA Hosp.,

New Orleans, A/SLMR No. 637)

10 24 12 Agreement Bar (Cont'd)

15 6-30-76
10 44 00

10 28 00 Status of Petitioner

Subsequent to a petition for a nation-wide unit of

all Airway Facilities Division employees, from which

this unit was excluded because of a contract bar, the

petition for this unit was timely filed. At the time

^ of the hearing, a decision regarding the nation-wide

unit had not been issued. Petitioner and Activity

sought to add-on this unit to nation-wide unit. A/S

noted that, although a decision regarding nation-wide

unit had been issued in A/SLMR No. 600, it would be

inappropriate to include these employees in the nationwide unit by an added-on election as no certification

of representative had been issued in that matter.

(Federal Aviation Adm., Airway Facilities Sector 37,

Tampa, Fla., A/SLMR No. 647)

Election results are set aside and petition dismissed

where evidence indicated that had investigation of

challenge to validity of showing of interest been

conducted, the Petitioner would have lost its status

and no election would have been held, (Navy, Navy

Commissary Store Complex, Oakland, A/SLMR No, 654)

10 32 00 Qualifications to Represent Specified Categories

of Employees

No Entries

10 36 00 Request for Review Rights

A/S determination, in the context of an administrative

review of an action taken by the ARD, of timeliness of

petition not subject to attack at representation hearing. (VA Cntr., Bath, N.Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

10 40 00 Area Administrator's Action (Area Director)

No Entries

10 44 00 Defunctness

(See also; 10 24 12, "Agreement Bar"

Exclusive representative not defunct where (1) national representative, a signatory to the parties'

negotiated agreement, appointed the local's secretary/treasurer to be acting president of the local;

6-30-76
10 44 00

10 44 00 Defunctness (Cont*d)

and (2 ) acting president continued to receive the

local's mail and have possession and control over

the local's funds, all in spite of local president's

attempt, by letter to the Activity, to disclaim, in

the name of the local, interest in representing the

unit employees. (HEW, Public Health Service Indian

Hosp., /Claremore, Okla., A/SLMR No, 568)

RA petition alleging a good faith doubt that the

NFFE continued to represent a majority of the empldyees in its unit dismissed where (1) such petition was

not filed during the "open period" established by

Sec. 202.3(c)(1) of the Regs; (2) NFFE not defunct

inasmuch as there had been at least one officer of

the NFFE at all times since its certification; (3)

the NFFE national office had taken affirmative action

to represent unit employees; and (4) there had been

58 members on continuing dues withholding. (Nat'l. Park

Service, A/SLMR No. 589)

Union found to be defunct with respect to two units

where units had no dues paying members and no local

officers, and where union declined to appear at hearing and disclaimed interest in representing the employees in its exclusively recognized units. (Navy, U.S.

Naval Sta. and Naval Amphibious Base, San Diego, Cal.,

and Coronado, Cal., A/SLMR No. 627)

17 6-30-76

15 16 00

15 00 00 REPRESENTATION HEARING PROCEDURE

15 04 00 Role of Hearing Officer

No Entries

15 08 00 Motions

15 08 04 General

HO ruled that Activity's contention that the

union could not promote effective dealings because it was without an elected president for

more than a year and the local was unable to

obtain quorum for election of officers had no

bearing on the appropriateness of the bargaining unit. (AAFES, Ft, Benning Exchange, Ft.

Benning, Ga,, A/SLMR No. 592)

A/s found no merit to Intervenor's claim, at

the hearing and in its post-hearing brief to

the A/s, that it was given adequate notice of

the matters to be addressed at the hearing inasmuch as Intervenor admitted on the record

that it had refused to sign a stipulation

limiting the scope of the hearing. (VA Cntr.,

Bath, N.Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

15 08 08 Amendment of Petition

Petition, as amended at hearing, was timely

filed as amendment did not significantly alter

the character or scope of the unit originally

sought but constituted a minor addition to conform the petitioned for unit to the certified

unit already in existence. (GSA, Region 4,

A/SLMR No. 661)

15 12 00 Evidence and Burden of Proof

Exhibits, rejected on the basis of their alleged irrelevancy by HO, found to be relevant and received into

the record. (Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Cntr.,

St. Louis, Mo., A/SLMR No. 569)

15 16 00 Unfair Labor Practice Allegations

Petitioner's assertion that negotiated agreement could

not act as a bar to its petition because it was negoti6-30-76 19
15 28 00

16 00 Unfair Labor Practice Allegations

ated^and s i p e d by a supervisor who was also the incumbent s president and chief negotiator rejected by A/S

because (1) such supervisory involvement was alleged to

have occurred more than six months prior to the filing

of the petition in the case; and (2 ) the negotiated agreement involved was otherwise valid on its face, (HEW,

Public Health Service Indian Hosp», Claremore, Okla*.

A/SLMR No. 568)

A/S found HO properly had rejected attempts by the Intervenor to raise issues at representation hearing which had

been the subject of previously filed unfair labor practice

complaints against the Activity or were related to issues

decided previously by the ARD or by the A/S, such as (1)

allegation that soliciation of signatures in support of

petition was conducted during work hours and in work

areas in violation of Sec. 20 of the EG; and (2) allegation that petition was "tainted" because Petitioner's

president, who signed petition and participated in collection of showing of interest, is supervisor. (VA Gntr.,

Bath, N.Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

15 20 00 Obligation of Parties

No Entries

15 24 00 Post-Hearing Submissions

That portion of an "Errata" which substantively amended

or added to the Petitioner's post-hearing brief was not

considered by the A/S as it was filed untimely. (FAA,

Airway Facilities Division, Alaskan Region, A/SLMR

No. 599)

That portion of an "Errata", filed by the Petitioner,

which substantively amended or added to its post-hearing brief was not considered by the A/S as it was filed

untimely. (FAA and FAA, Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

15 28 00 Remand

Case remanded for further hearings where record failed

to provide adequate basis on which to determine the

clarification action sought by the Petitioner. (Armv

Ft. McPherson, Ga., A/SLMR No. 586)

20 6-30-76
15 28 00

15 28 00 Remand (Cont'd)

Case remanded for further hearing when evidence failed

to provide sufficient evidence with respect to appropriateness of unit, (Army, Criminal Investigation Command, Third Region, Ft. Gillem, Forest Park, Ga., A/SLMR

No. 626)

6-30-76 21

20 00 00 REPRESENTATION UNIT DETERMINATIONS

20 04 00 Criteria

20 04 04 Cotnmunity of Interest

Unit of one post exchange which was a component

of a larger post exchange held not appropriate

where claimed employees did not share a clear

and identifiable community of interest which

was separate and distinct from excluded

employees. (AAFES, Post Exchange, Defense

Depot Memphis, A/SLMR No. 545)

Position of Activity that petitioned for unit

of nonprofessionals is inappropriate because

professionals and nonprofessionals have a

community of interest together rejected by A/S

as EG, Sec. 10(b)(4), requires that professional

employees be given a self-determination election.

Therefore, separate findings of appropriateness

would have been required even if a mixed unit

had been petitioned for. (Defense Mapping

Agency Aerospace Cntr., St. Louis, Mo.,

A/SLMR No. 569)

RO petition, seeking a Branch-wide unit, dismissed inasmuch as claimed employees did not

possess clear and identifiable community of

interest separate and distinct from the other

Division employees. It was noted particularly

that (1) all Branches operate under centralized

control of Division Director; (2) all Division

employees operate under the same uniform personnel procedures; and (3) operation of the

Branches of the Division is highly integrated.

(Dept, of Agric., Agric. Research Service,

Budget and Finance Division, Accounting Services

Branch, New Orleans, La., A/SLMR No. 579)

Contrary to the position taken by the Activity,

the employees in the division located at the

regional headquarters share a community of

interest with the employees in the division

assigned to the field. Thus, all employees

of the division share common overall supervision, mission, job classifications, working

conditions, similar areas of consideration for

promotions and reductions-in-force, and all

work under the same technical standards. (FAA,

Airways Facilities Division, Alaskan Region,

A/SLMR No. 599)

20 04 04

6-30-76 23
A nationwide unit of all nonprofessional

Airway Facilities Division employees, including those assigned to and located at the

various regional headquarters, was found

appropriate by A/S where they share a community

of interest which is separate and distinct from

other employees of the Federal Aviation Administration and where all employees of the division

share (1 ) a common mission, (2 ) common overall

supervision, (3) similar personnel policies and

practices, and (4) essentially similar job classifications, duties, and working conditions; and

where interchange and transfer across regional

boundaries is common. (FAA and FAA, Eastern

Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

Claimed unit composed of two functional activities is not appropriate where included

employees have little, if any, direct work

contact and do not share a community of interest

with each other which is separate and distinct

from other employees of the Activity. (FAA, Nat'l.

Aviation Facilities Experimental Cntr., Atlantic

City, N. J., A/SLMR No. 606)

Unit limited to switchboard operators at one

switchboard in area inappropriate where (1) all

switchboards in area share common supervision

from area manager; (2 ) employees are subject to

uniform personnel policies, possess similar skills,

and use standard operating procedures; and (3)

interchange among switchboards has occured. (GSA,

Region 3, A/SLMR No. 616)

Proposed unit of guards who make up one branch

of Security Division held inappropriate where

(1) all employees in the division share a

common mission, supervision, and areas of consideration; and (2 ) division has an integrated

operation with a common divisional career ladder.

(Navy, Naval Electronics Lab. Cntr., San Diego,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 622)

Claimed units are appropriate where, among

other factors, included employees share clear

and identifiable communities of interest which

are separate and distinct from other employees.

(Navy, U. S. Naval Sta. and Naval Amphibious

Base, San Diego, Cal. and Coronado, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 627)

20 04 04 Community of Interest (cont*d')

24 6-30-76
Proposed unit of guards, police, and detectives petitioned for by Teamsters found appropriate where petitioned for unit was a residual

unit and constituted a functionally distinct

grouping of employees who shared a community of

interest separate and distinct from other employees

of the Activity. (Navy, Naval Support Activity,

Long Beach, Cal., A/SLMR No. 629)

Claimed unit not appropriate where included

employees do not share a clear and identifiable

community of interest which is separate and distinct from excluded employees. (Army, Hq.,

WAMTMC, Oakland, Cal., A/SLMR No. 591; Army,

U. S. Army Reserves, 425th Transportation Command,

Forest Park, 111., A/SLMR No. 636)

Proposed unit held appropriate where, among

other factors, included employees share a clear

and identifiable community of interest which is

separate and distinct from excluded employees,

particularly in view of past history of exclusive

recognition covering same unit without impairment

of effective dealings or agency operations. (GSA,

Region 4, A/SLMR No. 661)

20 04 08 Effective Dealings

(See 20 04 12, "Efficiency of Operations")

Unit of one post exchange which was a component

of a larger post exchange held not appropriate

where, among other factors, it would result in

fragmented units which could not reasonably be

expected to promote effective dealings and

efficiency of operations. (AAFES, Post Exchange,

Defense Depot Memphis, A/SLMR No. 545)

The unit found appropriate would promote

effective dealings as such unit organizationally

included individuals most concerned with labormanagement relations, fiscal matters, and the

direction of operations. Unit found appropriate

and would promote effective dealings even

though it does not include all employees directly

under area or regional head. Order intended to

encourage negotiations at local level since the

particular employees are most closely involved.

(DSA. DCASR, San Francisco, Cal., A/SLMR No. 559)

20 04 08

20 04 04 Community of Interest (cont'd)

6-30-76 25
Overall unit comprising all professional and

nonprofessional employees of a National Forest

and Job Corps Civilian Conservation Center held

appropriate under all circumstances, particularly in view of the fact that the parties are in

essential agreement that an overall unit would

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations. (Dept, of Agric., Wolf Creek Job

Corps Civilian Conservation Cntr., Ore.,

A/SLMR No. 567)

A/C petition, seeking to amend recognition of

unit to include administratively transferred

employees, granted where it was held that (1 )

the disputed employees continued, as before, to

share a clear and identifiable community of

interest with other unit employees represented

by the Petitioner; and (2) such action would

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations. (AAFES, Ft. Benning Exchange, Ft.

Benning, Ga., A/SLMR No. 592)

Unit found appropriate will promote effective

dealings because, among other things, it is

consistent with the agency's delegation of its

negotiation authority and with the level at

which the agency has provided a specialized

labor relations staff. (FAA, Airways Facilities

Division, Alaskan Region, A/SLMR No. 599)

The nationwide unit found appropriate will promote effective dealings as, among other things,

it is at the level at which overall personnel

and labor relations policies are initiated and

as it will reduce fragmentation. (FAA, and FAA,

Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

Claimed unit is not appropriate where, among

other factors, it would result in fragmented

units which could not reasonably be expected to

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations. (GSA, Region 3, A/SLMR No. 616;

Navy, Naval Electronics Lab. Cntr., San Diego,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 622; Army, U. S. Army Reserves,

425th Transportation Command, Forest Park, 111.,

A/SLMR No. 636)

Units of guards, police, and detectives are

appropriate where no evidence was presented to

show a lack of effective dealings experienced

with prior units of security personnel. (Navy,

U. S. Naval Sta. and Naval Amphibious Base, San

Diego, Cal. and Coronado, Cal., A/SLMR No. 627)

20 04 08

20 04 08 Effective Dealings (cont'd')

26 6-30-76
Proposed unit of guards, police, and detectives

petitioned for by Teamsters found to promote

effective dealings where petitioned for unit was,

in effect, a residual unit and constituted a

functionally distinct grouping of employees.

(Navy, Naval Support Activity, Long Beach, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 629)

Proposed unit held appropriate where, among

other factors, included employees share a

clear and identifiable community of interest

which is separate and distinct from excluded

employees, particularly in view of past history

of exclusive recognition covering same unit

without impairment of effective dealings or agency

operations. (GSA, Region 4, A/SLMR No. 661)

20 04 12 Efficiency of Operations

(See also 20 04 08, "Effective Dealings")

Unit of one post exchange which was a component

of a larger post exchange held not appropriate

where, among other factors, it would result in

fragmented units which could not reasonably be

expected to promote effective dealings and efficiency of operations. (AAFES, Post Exchange,

Defense Depot Memphis, A/SLMR No. 545)

A/S concluded that less than region-wide unit

would promote efficiency of agency operations

and could, in his opinion, result in actual

economic savings and increased productivity due

to the homogeneity of its compostion. (DSA,

DCASR, San Francisco, Cal., A/SLMR No. 559)

Overall unit comprising all professional and

nonprofessional employees of a National Forest

and Job Corps Civilian Conservation Center held

appropriate under all circumstances, particularly

in view of the fact that the parties are in

essential agreement that an overall unit would

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations. (Dept, of Agric., Wolf Creek Job

Corps Civilian Conservation Cntr., Ore.,

A/SLMR No. 567)

Unit found appropriate will promote efficiency

as it will, among other things, reduce unit

fragmentation by including several less comprehensive units and certain unrepresented employees

in one unit. (FAA, Airways Facilities Division,

Alaskan Region, A/SLMR No. 599)

20 04 12

20 04 08 Effective Dealings (cont'd)

27
The nationwide unit found appropriate will promote efficiency where, among other things, it

will reduce fragmentation and is at the level

at which personnel and labor relations policies

are initiated. (FAA, and FAA, Eastern Region,

A/SLMR No. 600)

Claimed unit is not appropriate where, among

other factors, it would result in fragmented

units which, could not reasonably be expected to

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations. (GSA, Region 3, A/SLMR No. 616;

Navy, Naval Electronics Lab. Cntr., San Diego,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 622; Army, U.S. Army Reserves,

425th Transportation Command, Forest Park, 111.,

A/SLMR No. 636)

No evidence that units of security personnel

would impair efficiency of agency operations.

(Navy, U. S. Naval Sta. and Naval Amphibious

Base, San Diego, Cal. and Coronado, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 627)

Proposed unit of guards, police, and detectives

petitioned for by Teamsters found to promote

efficiency of operations where petitioned for

unit was, in effect, a residual unit and constituted a functionally distinct grouping of

employees. (Navy, Naval Support Activity, Long

Beach, Cal., A/SLMR No. 629)

Proposed unit held appropriate where, among

other factors, included employees share a clear

and identifiable community of interest which is

separate and distinct from excluded employees,

particularly in view of past history of exclusive recognition covering same unit without

impairment of effective dealings or agency

operations. (GSA, Region 4, A/SLMR No. 661)

20 04 16 Agency Regulations and Parties' Stipulations

Not Binding on Assistant Secretary

(See also; 25 12 04, "Challenges, Eligibility

of Employees", for Stipulations of Parties

Related to Challenges.)

20 04 16

20 04 12 Efficiency of Operations (cont'd)

A/C petition seeking to designate a change in

organizational title, of Activity is granted

where parties had stipulated to the change in

organizational title and where there was no

evidence to indicate that such stipulation was

improper.

28 6-30-76
20 04 16 Agency Regulations and Parties' Stipulations

Not Binding on Assistant Secretary (cont'd)

(Air Force, Aeronautical Systems Division, Air

Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB,

Ohio, A/SLMR No. 590)

20 04 20 Previous Certification

A self-determination election was ordered in a

unit at the regional level in which the regionwide Co-Petitioner sought to include in one

unit the employees currently represented in two

units under one negotiated agreement by the

nationwide Co-Petitioner. (FAA and FAA, Eastern

Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

20 08 00 Geographic Scope

20 08 04 World-wide

No Entries

20 08 08 Nation-wide

No Entries

20 08 12 State-wide

No Entries

20 08 16 City-wide

No Entries

20 12 00 Organizational Scope

20 12 04 Agency-wide

A/S found that an agency-wide unit of all professional and nonprofessional employees of the

Federal Energy Administration was appropriate

as the record established that the employees

have a clear and identifiable community of interest in that they share a common mission and

common overall supervision, they are employed

under uniform personnel policies and practices

and they enjoy essentially similar job description and duties. The A/S also noted that such

a unit would promote effective dealings and

efficiency of agency operations in that the

level of recognition would occur at the same

level where labor relations policies and personnel

policies and practices are formulated. (Fed.

Energy Adm., A/SLMR No. 611)

20 12 04
20 12 08 Activity-wide

Overall unit comprising all professional and

nonprofessional employees of the UMPQUA

National Forest, Roseburg, Oregon (Forest)

and the Wolf Creek Job Corps Civilian Conservation Center (Center) may, if the professionals

so vote, constitute an appropriate unit. (Dept,

of Agric., Wolf Creek Job Corps Civilian Conservation Cntr., Ore., A/SLMR No. 567)

Activity-wide unit of nonprofessionals held

appropriate even where Activity argued professionals should be included because separate

findings of appropriateness would have been

required under Sec. 10(b)(4) of the Order even

if a mixed unit had been petitioned for.

(Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Cntr., St.

Louis, Mo., A/SLMR No. 569)

Unit of all professional and nonprofessional

employees at Veterans Admifii strati on Center

found appropriate pending self-determination

election of professionals pursuant to Sec.

10(b)(4) of EO. With exception of cemetery

employees and employees working for canteen

service. Activity's employees operate under

same supervisory hierarchy and are subject to

common personnel policies and practices promulgated by the Activity. Canteen employees included because of consensus among the parties

and historical inclusion in existing exclusively

recognized unit. However, cemetery employees excluded from recognized unit because they no longer shared a clear and indentifiable community of

interest with employees of the Activity as a

result of a reorganization. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . ,

A/SLMR No. 605)

20 12 12 Di re c to r a te -wi de

Unit limited to all nonprofessional General

Schedule employees within Directorate of

Personal Property at Activity found inappropriate because, among other things, employees

in proposed unit did not share a separate and

distinct community of interest apart from other

unrepresented Activity employees. (Army, Hq.,

WAMTMC, Oakland, Cal., A/SLMR No. 591)

20 12 12

20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont*d)

6-30-76
20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont'd)

20 12 16 Command-wide

20 12 20

Residual command-wide unit of all Army Reserve

Technicians of the 425th Transportation Command,

U. S. Army Reserves (excluding Technicians

assigned to duty stations in states of Iowa and

Minnesota) found appropriate, but petition dismissed for insufficient showing of interest.

(Army, U. S, Army Reserves, 425th Transportation

Command, Forest Park, 111., A/SLMR No. 636)

20 12 20 Headquarters-wide

A/s found broad unit of both Headquarters and

five field offices and a residency office appropriate based on (1) reassignments between Headquarters and the six offices; (2 ) employee contact between Headquarters and the six offices

with training sessions for employees located in

six offices held at Headquarters; and (3) clear

and identifiable community of interest among

employees in comprehensive unit, where such unit

will promote effective dealings and efficiency

of agency operations. (DSA, DCASR, San Francisco,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 559)

Unit of all professional and nonprofessional

employees at Regional Office, but excluding

field employees, is appropriate. (GSA, Regional

Off., Region 4, A/SLMR No. 575)

Unit of all professional and nonprofessional

employees employed in headquarters unit is appropriate. (Dept, of Interior, Bureau of Indian

Affairs, Fairbanks Agency Off., Fairbanks, Alas.,

A/SLMR No. 607)

A/S found a unit of all professional and nonprofessional employees of the Federal Energy

Administration Headquarters was appropriate as

the employees enjoy separate immediate supervision; are concerned primarily with the formulation of policy, as opposed to the implementation of policy; have little or no job related

contact with the field employees; have limited

interchange and transfer with field employees

and enjoy common job functions, working conditions and location. The A/S also noted that

labor relations policies and personnel policies

and practices are formulated at the National

Headquarters level. (Fed. Energy Adm.,

A/SLMR No. 611)

31
32

20 12 24 Field-wide

No Entries

20 12 28 Region-wide

Region-wide unit of all eligible employees

held inappropriate (DSA, DCASR, San Francisco,

Cal.; DCASD, Seattle, Wash., A/SLMR No. 564)

A/S found that a unit of all professional and

nonprofessional employees of the Southeast

Regional Office of the Regional Commissioner

of the Internal Revenue Service was appropriate

for the purpose of exclusive recognition and

would promote effective dealings and efficiency

of agency operations. (IRS, A/SLMR No. 565)

A region-wide unit, coextensive with two existing certified units presently under one agreement, was found appropriate, even though the

petitioned for unit was not coextensive, because

(1) the petition sought essentially the same

employees; and (2) the Petitioner's intention to

represent these employees in one unit was clear.

A self-determination election was ordered also

as the incumbent exclusive representative was a

Co-Petitioner who sought to include these

employees in a nationwide unit. (FAA and FAA,

Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

A/S found separate region-wide units were

appropriate as the employees assigned to Federal

Energy Administration Regions I, II and V separately

shared a clear and identifiable community of interest separate and distinct from each other and

from other Federal Energy Administration employees.

The A/S noted that (1) the employees in each region

enjoy common supervision and working conditions;

(2 ) they generally perform their work only within

the geographic boundaries of their own region;

(3) there is limited work integration or interchange of personnel between regions, or between

the region and the National Headquarters; and

(4) each region has its own basic concentration

and focus of program resulting from the particular circumstances existing within the geographical location of the region involved. The A/S

further noted the position of the Federal Energy

Administration with respect to the appropriateness of region-wide units, and the fact that the

20 12 28

20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont'd)

6-30-76
: (p) <§

20 12 36

20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont'd)

20 12 28 Region-wide (cont'd)

RA has been delegated authority and responsibility within the region with respect to hiring,

employee discipline, the transfer of employees,

handling of grievances, as well as the authority

to negotiate collective bargaining agreements.

(Fed. Energy Adm., A/SLMR No. 611)

20 12 32 Division-wide

RO petition seeking a branch-wide unit dismissed inasmuch as claimed employees do not

possess clear and identifiable community of

interest separate and distinct from the other

Division employees. It was noted particularly

that (1) all Branches operate under centralized

control of Division Director; (2) all Division

employees operate under the same uniform personnel procedures; and (3) operation of the

Branches of the Division is highly integrated.

(Dept, of Agric., Agric. Research Service,

Budget and Finance Division, Accounting Services

Branch, New Orleans, La., A/SLMR No. 579)

Unit of all Airways Facilities Division

employees in Alaskan Region of the Federal

Aviation Administration found appropriate by

the A/S. (FAA, Airways Facilities Division,

Alaskan Region, A/SLMR No. 599)

Residual nationwide unit of all employees in

one division of the FAA found in the regions

found appropriate by the A/S. (FAA and FAA,

Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

20 12 36 Area-wide

Unit limited to one switchboard in an area

inappropriate where (1) all switchboards

share common day-to-day supervision from area

manager; (2 ) operators are subject to common

personnel policies, possess similar skills,

and use standard operating procedures; and (3)

interchange among switchboards has occurred,

(GSA, Region 3, A/SLMR No. 616)

6-30-76 33
20 12 40 District-wide

As a result of reorganization and abolishment

of DCASD, Activity-Petitioner sought to clarify

status of approximately twenty-five employees

who were physically and functionally transferred

to another DCASD, to show that they had become

intermingled and essentially indistinguishable

from the bargaining unit employees of the new

DCASD and, therefore, should be included in the

exclusively recognized unit. (Defense Contract

Administration Services Region (DCASR), Philadelphia, A/SLMR No. 609)

20 12 44 Branch-wide

RO petition, seeking a branch-wide unit, dismissed inasmuch as claimed employees do not

possess clear and identifiable community of

interest separate and distinct from the other

Division employees. It was noted particularly that (1) all Branches operate under centralized control of Division Director; (2) all

Division employees operate under the same uniform personnel procedures; and (3) operation of

the Branches of the Division is highly integrated. (Dept, of Agric., Agric. Research

Service, Budget and Finance Division, Accounting Services Branch, New Orleans, La.,

A/SLMR No. 579)

Branch-wide unit held inappropriate where, among

other factors, claimed employees shared a

community of interest at the divisional level,

and unit would fragment operations. (Navy,

Naval Electronics Lab. Cntr., San Diego, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 622)

20 12 48 Base-wide

A/C petition, seeking to amend recognition of

unit to include administratively transferred

employees, granted where it was held that (1)

the disputed employees continued, as before,

to share a clear and identifiable community of

interest with other unit employees represented by the Petitioner and (2) such action would

promote effective dealings and efficiency of

operations (AAFES, Ft. Benning Exchange, Ft.

Benning, Ga., A/SLMR No. 592)

20 12 48

20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont'd)

34 6-30-76
20 12 00 Organizational Scope (cont*d)

20 12 52 Section-wide

No Entries

20 12 56 Multi-Installation

20 12 64

Unit of all eligible employees of Activity's

Defense Contract Administration Services,

Seattle District, found appropriate. (DSA,

DCASR, San Francisco, Cal.; DCASD, Seattle,

Washington, A/SLMR No. 564)

20 12 60 Single Installation

Unit of one post exchange which was a component

of a larger post exchange held not appropriate.

(AAFES, Post Exchange, Defense Depot Memphis,

A/SLMR No. 545)

A/S found that the separate units of nonprofessional employees of the Federal Energy

Administration Los Angeles and San Diego Area

Offices were not appropriate as the employees

in the area office units do not enjoy an identifiable community of interest separate and

distinct from each other, or from the other

employees of Federal Energy Administration

Region IX. A/S noted that both area offices

are organizational components of Federal Energy

Administration, Region IX, and are subject to

the authority and responsibility of the RA; the

job descriptions and duties of employees in the

unit are essentially similar to those of other

employees in the Region; the Area Managers are

first line supervisors who have been delegated

minimal authority with regard to personnel

matters; and all employees in the Region enjoy

common personnel policies and practices established by the RA and essentially similar working

conditions. (Fed. Energy Adm., A/SLMR No. 611)

20 12 64 Occupational Classification

Unit of medical technologists, or in the alternative, a unit of medical technologists,

chemists, and microbiologists, within the

medical laboratory at Veterans Administration

Hospital is inappropriate. (VA Wadsworth Hosp.

Cntr., A/SLMR No. 546; VA Hosp., Palo Alto, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 552; VA Hosp., San Francisco, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 553)

35
20 12 64 Occupational Classification (cont*d)

Unit limited to switchboard operators at one

switchboard in area inappropriate where (1 ) all

switchboards subject to common supervision from

area manager; (2 ) operators are subject to uniform

personnel policies, possess similar skills, and

use standard operating procedures; and (3) interchange among the switchboards has occured. (GSA,

Region 3, A/SLMR No. 616)

Claimed unit of guards held inappropriate where,

among other factors, guards shared community of

interest at the divisional level, and unit would

fragment operations (Navy, Naval Electronics Lab.

Cntr., San Diego, Cal., A/SLMR No. 622)

Units of guards, police, and detectives found

appropriate. (Navy, U. S. Naval Sta. and Naval

Amphibious Base, San Diego, Cal. and Coronado,

Cal., A/SLMR No. 627)

20 16 00 Special Situations

20 16 04 Severence

Petition seeking to sever unit of civilian

firefighters from existing base-wide unit

found to have been filed, untimely inasmuch as

civilian firefighters were covered by current

negotiated agreement. (Air Force, 31st Combat

Support Group, Homestead AFB, Homestead, Fla.,

A/SLMR No. 549)

20 16 08 Accretion

Employees of Outpatient Clinic located in

Orlando, Florida, did not constitute accretion

or addition to existing exclusively recognized

unit of employees at Veterans Administration

Hospital, Tampa, Florida. (VA Hosp., Tampa,

Fla., A/SLMR No. 551)

Activity's contention that employees at some

thirteen dispensaries located at other facilities and now assigned administratively to the

Regional Medical Center had accreted to existing unit at the Naval Hospital rejected since

(1) the dispensary employees have remained at

same location as prior to the reorganization.

20 16 08

20 12 GO Organizational Scope (cont*d)

36 6-30-76
20 ib cia

I

20 16 00 Special Situations (cont*d)

20 16 08 Accretion (cont'd)

performing the same work, under the same immediate

supervision; and (2 ) the evidence failed to reveal

any significant degree of interchange, transfer,

or commingling between dispensary and hospital

personnel. (Navy, Philadelphia Naval Regional

Medical Cntr., A/SLMR No. 558)

Certain employees of a NFFE unit accreted to an

IBPAT unit where the mission, functions, and

personnel policies and practices of one of the

parks of the Activity had been substantially

affected by a reorganization so that its employees became thoroughly combined and integrated with the employees of the parks of a different

Activity wherein IBPAT held exclusive recognition.

(Nat'l. Park Service, A/SLMR No. 589)

A/C petition seeking to designate a change in

organizational title of Activity is granted

where parties had stipulated to the change in

organizational title and where there was no

evidence to indicate that such stipulation was

improper. (Air Force, Aeronautical Systems

Division, Air Force Systems Command, WrightPatterson AFB, Ohio, A/SLMR No. 590)

As a result of reorganization and abolishment

of DCASD, Activity-Petitioner sought to clarify

status of approximately twenty-five employees

who were physically and functionally transferred

to another DCASD, to show that they had become

intermingled and essentially indistinguishable

from the bargaining unit employees of the new

DCASD and, therefore, should be included in the

exclusively recognized unit. (Defense Contract

Administration Services Region (DCASR),

Philadelphia, A/SLMR No. 609)

No accretion found to unit where Executive Order

11491, as amended by Executive Order 11838, no

longer excluded guards from non-guard units

considered otherwise appropriate. A/S found that

the amended Order did not mandate that unrepresented guards be deemed to have accreted into existing exclusively recognized units. (Navy, Naval

Support Activity, Long Beach, Cal., A/SLMR No. 629)

6-30-76 37
20 16 08 A c c r e t i o n (cont*d)

A/s dismissed AC/CU petition, finding that it 

w o u l d n o t effectuate the purposes and policies 

of the O r d e r to amend a certification and 

clarify a uni t where, as here, the employees 

sought to be added to the certified unit had 

not, in fact, been hired. (HEW, Social and 

R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Service, Central Off., Washington,

D. C . , A / S L M R No. 632)

R e o r g a n i z a t i o n w h i c h occurred w a s primarily 

administrative and did n o t so thoroughly combine 

and integrate two separate units as to r e ­

quire a finding that one unit had lost its 

independent identity. On this basis, and in 

light of the fact that a disclaimer of interest 

w a s filed for one of the units, the CU petition 

was ordered dismissed and it was concluded that 

the employees in the disclaimed unit were p r e s e n t ­

ly unrepresented. (Army, Ft. McPherson, G a . ,

A / S L M R No. 655)

20 16 12 Eligibility

A/S affirmed A / S L M R No. 212 that "seasonal 

supervisors" be included in unit during period 

wh e n they are not supervising employees.

(U. S. Forest "Service, Salmon National Forest, 

Salmon, Ida., A/SL M R No. 556)

20 16 16 Residual Employees

Residual, activity-wide unit of all n o n p r o f e s s i o n ­

al employees found appropriate. (FAA, Nat'l. 

A viation Facilities Experimental C n t r . , Atlantic 

City, N.J., A / S L M R No. 606)

Proposed unit of guards, police, and detectives 

petitioned for by Teamsters found appropriate 

w here petitioned for unit was, in effect, a 

residual unit and constituted a functionally 

distinct grouping of employees. (Navy, Naval 

Support Activity, Long Beach, Cal., A/S L M R No. 629)

20 16 16

20 16 00 Special Situations (cont*d)

6-30-76
20 16 00 Special Situations (cont*d) 

20 16 20 S e l f - D e t e r m i n a t i o n

20 16 28

Despite A c tivity's contention that only a mixed 

uni t of profes s i o n a l s and nonprofessionals had 

a c o m m unity of interest, petitioned for unit of 

n o n p r o f e s s i o n a l s found appropriate because Sec. 

10(b)(4) requires a self-determination election 

for profes s i o n a l s where they are included in a 

m i x e d unit, and, therefore, separate determinations of appropriateness for professionals and 

n o n p r o f e s s i o n a l would have been included anjrway. 

(Defense M a p p i n g Age n c y Aerospace C n t r . , St.

Louis, Mo., A / S L M R No. 569)

N o t i n g that the existence of a bargaining history 

in several less comprehensive units with i n the 

n ati o n w i d e unit found appropriate and that, in 

fact, no party to the proceeding specifically 

argued their inappropriateness, the A/S ordered 

that self-determination elections be conducted.

In addition, he ordered a self-determination 

e le c t i o n in a unit in which a consolidated p e ­

tition was filed for a single unit to include 

the employees currently represented in two units 

w i t h one agreement by the nationwide Petitioner. 

(FAA and FAA, Eastern Region, A/SLMR No. 600)

Self-determination election directed for p r o ­

fessionals where professional and nonprofessional 

employees are sought in one unit. (VA C n t r . ,

Bath, N. Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

Two separate existing units encompassed in a 

larger unit found appropriate but given a selfdetermination election to ascertain w h ether the 

employees desired to remain in their existing 

units. (FAA, N a t ' 1. Aviation Facilities E xperimental Cntr., Atlantic City, N. J., A/SLMR No. 606)

20 16 24 Supervisory Unit 

No Entries 

20 16 28 Reorganization

R A petition dismissed even though claimed unit 

is co-extensive wit h the community of interest 

among employees at an activity which added the

6-30-76 39
20 16 28 R e o r g a n i z a t i o n (cont*d)

functions, physical facilities, and some 

employees (exclusively represented by NAGE) of 

another activity w h i c h had been deactivated. 

E lection pursuant to the R A petition n ot 

appropriate because employees exclusively r e ­

presented by the NAGE at the deactivated activity 

are n o t n o w substantially identifiable w i t h any 

pre-existing units; the employees had been i n ­

tegrated into a different activity w h e r e i n 

employees had n o t b een previously represented 

in an e x clusively recognized unit. (U. S. Coast 

Guard Air S t a . , Non-Appr o p r i a t e d Fund Activity, 

Cape Cod, Mass., A / S L M R No. 561)

A/S found that certified unit remained appropriate 

after reorganization inasmuch as reorganization 

did not result in any change in day-to-day terms 

and conditions of employment of the employees, 

including their physical locations, their job 

functions, and their immediate supervision. 

Further, the A/S found that altering the unit 

as proposed by the Petitioner-Activity, where a 

history of bargaining existed, w o u l d tend to 

promote fragmentation and inhibit effective 

dealings and efficiency of operations. (Naval 

Aerospace and Regional Medical C n t r . , Pensacola, 

Fla. and Naval Aerospace Medical R esearch Lab., 

Pensacola, Fla. and Naval Aerospace Medical 

Inst., Pensacola, Fla., A / S L M R No. 603)

Following reorganization, a n e w organizational 

entity was created w h i c h was separate and d i s ­

tinct from Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, or 

Headquarters, Fifth U. S. Army, and employees 

w ere no longer part of any existing unit.

Claimed unit of all nonprofessional employees 

of the U. S. A rmy Communications Command Agency, 

Fort Sam Houston, Texas (USACC-FSH) found app r o ­

priate. (U. S. Army Communications Command 

Agency, Ft. Sam Houston, T e x . , A / S L M R No. 604)

Two existing units encompassed in w r i t t e n p e t i ­

tion for residual unit filed in the instant case 

found to be viable and appropriate as record did 

n ot reflect any change in the scope and character 

of the units since the prior decision in 

A/SLMR No. 482. Self-determination election

20 16 28

20 16 OU Special Situations (cont*d)

40 6-30-76
^0 Si

20 20 00

20 16 28 R e o r g a n i z a t i o n (cont'd)

o r dered to a s c e rtain w h e t h e r or not these 

e m p l oyees desired to remain in their e x i s t ­

ing units. (FAA, Nat'l. Avia t i o n Facilities 

E x p e rimental C n t r . , A tlantic City, N. J . ,

A / S L M R No. 606)

A reo r g a n i z a t i o n w h i c h consolidated the public 

w o r k s functions of six D O D facilities within 

the San Francisco Bay area into a n e w organizational entity, the Navy Public Works Center, 

p roduced a n e w overall unit consisting of all 

n o n s u p e r v i s o r y W G and GS employees of the Center. 

The A/S directed an election to determine whether 

any of the 8 exclusive representatives who r e ­

p resented employees in some 12 exclusively r e ­

cognized units in the 6 releasing activities 

represented the employees in the n e w unit found 

appropriate. (Navy Public Works Cntr., San 

Francisco Bay, A / S L M R No. 628)

R eorgani z a t i o n which occurred was primarily 

administrative and did not so thoroughly c ombine and integrate two separate units as to 

require a finding that one unit had lost its 

independent identity. On this basis, and in 

light of the fact that a disclaimer of interest 

was filed for one of the units, the CU petition 

was ordered dismissed and it was concluded that 

the employees in the disclaimed unit were p r e ­

sently unrepresented. (Army, Ft. McPherson,

G a . , A/SLMR No. 655)

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications

Administrative Aide in District and Branch Office is c o n ­

fidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of Field Operations, 

Boston Region, District and Branch Offices, A/SLMR No. 562)

Administrative Assistant excluded from unit as confidential 

employee. (IRS, A/SLMR No. 565)

Administrative Assistant, Administrative Services and 

Resources, GS-9 is supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service,

Salmon National Forest, Salmon, I d a . , A/SLMR No. 556)

Administrative Clerk in District and Branch Office is 

confidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of Field O p erations, Boston Region, District and Branch Offices,

A / S L M R No. 562)

20 16 00 Special Situations (cont*d)

41
Admi n i s t r a t i v e Coordi n a t o r for Nursing is supervisor.

(VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A/SL M R No. 605)

Adm i n i s t r a t i v e Intern excluded from unit as confidential 

employee. (IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Adm i n i s t r a t i v e Officer performs Federal personnel w o r k 

in o ther than a pure l y clerical capacity. (HUD, FHA, 

Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A / S L M R No. 645)

A nalysts in the M a n a g e m e n t and Resources Branch are not 

m a n a g e m e n t officials but are resource persons w hose r e ­

commendations are subject to extensive review before 

either acceptance or i m plementation and they are not 

individuals who actively participate in the ultimate 

determination of w h a t policy, in fact, will be. (IRS, 

Nat'l. Off., Washington, D. C . , A/S L M R No. 630)

Analysts in the Revenue Accounting and Processing Branch 

are n o t m a n a g e m e n t officials but are resource persons 

whose recommendations are subject to extensive review 

before either acceptance or implementation and they are 

no t individuals who actively participate in the ultimate 

determination of w h a t policy, in fact, will be. (IRS, 

Nat'l. Off., Washington, D. C. A / S L M R No. 630)

Auditor-in-Charge is not supervisor. (Defense Contract 

Audit Agency, Chicago Region, Chicago, 111.,

A / S L M R No. 610)

Budget A n a lyst is n o t mana g e m e n t official. (iRS,

A/SL M R No. 565; HEW, Off. of the Secretary, H q . ,

A/SL M R No. 596)

Budget and Accounting Officer, GS-12 is supervisor.

(U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, 

Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Canteen employees included in unit found appropriate 

because of consensus among the parties and historical 

inclusion in existing exclusively recognized unit, even 

though canteen employees operate under different supervisory hierarchy than Activity's employees and are not 

subject to common personnel policies and practices p r o ­

mul g a t e d by the Activity. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . ,

A / S L M R No. 605)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

42 6-30-76
Cemetery employees excluded from unit found appropriate 

because they no longer shared a clear and identifiable 

community of int e r e s t w i t h employees of the Activity as 

a result of a reorganization. (VA C n t r . , Bath, N. Y . , 

A / S L M R No. 605)

Cha p l a i n is professional employee. (VA Cntr., Bath, N.Y., 

A / S L M R No. 605)

Ch e m i s t is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official. (Energy Research and 

D e v e l o p m e n t A d m . , H q . , A / S L M R No. 634)

Civil Engineer, GS-11 is supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service, 

Salmon N ational Forest, Salmon, Ida., A/SLMR No. 556)

C l e r k to A r e a Supervisor excluded from unit because, as 

the onl y clerical and administrative employee in an Area 

Office, the incumbent types and processes paperwork involving disc i p l i n a r y actions, reductions-in-force, and matters 

relating to the Area Office Supervisor's responsibility for 

labor relations. (Dept, of the Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, 

T o b a c c o and Fireaims, Washington, D. C . , A/SLMR No. 538)

C l e r k - S e cretaries assigned to the Sector Manager and the 

Field Office Chiefs are confidential employees. (FAA, 

A i r w a y Facilities Sector 37, Tampa, Fla., A/S L M R No. 647)

C le r k - S t e n o g r a p h e r is confidential employee whe n serving 

in a confidential capacity to an individual involved in 

the formulation and effectuation of m a n agement policies 

in the field of labor relations. (HUD, FHA, Fargo 

Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A/SLMR No. 645)

Clerk-Typist excluded from unit as confidential employee. 

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

C omputer Systems Analysts are not management officials^

resource persons whose recommendations are subject 

to extensive review before either acceptance or i m p lementation and they are not individuals who actively part i c i ­

pate in the ultimate determination of w hat policy, in 

fact, wil l be. (IRS, Nat'l. Off., Washington, D. C . ,

A / S L M R No. 630)

Confidential Employees

Administrative Aide in District and Branch Office 

is confidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of 

Field Operations, Boston Region, District and 

Branch Offices, A/SLMR No. 562)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

6-30-76 

ML. O = J ' U * !

43
Confidential Employees (cont'd)

Admi n i s t r a t i v e A s s i s t a n t excluded from unit as 

confidential employee. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Administ r a t i v e Clerk in Dis t r i c t and Branch Office 

is confidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of 

F ield Operations, Boston Region, District and 

Branch Offices, A / S L M R No. 562)

A d ministrative Intern excluded from unit as c onfidential employee. (IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Clerk to Area Supervisor excluded from unit b e ­

cause, as the only clerical and administrative 

employee in an Area Office, the incumbent types 

and processes paperwork involving disciplinary 

actions, reductions-in-force, and m a tters r e ­

lating to the Area Office Supervisor's r e s p o n ­

sibility for labor relations. (Dept, of the 

Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and F i r e ­

arms, Washington, D. C., A / S L M R No. 538)

Clerk-Secretaries assi.gned to the Sector Man a g e r 

and the Field Office Chiefs are confidential 

employees. (FAA, Airway Facilities Sector 37, 

Tampa, Fla., A / S L M R No. 647)

C 1erk-Stenographer is confidential employee 

w h e n serving in a confidential capacity to an 

individual involved in the formulation and e f f e c ­

tuation of man a g e m e n t policies in the field of 

labor relations. (HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring 

Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A/SL M R No. 645)

C lerk-Typist excluded from unit as confidential 

employee. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Operations Analysts are not confidential employees 

and do n o t serve in a confidential capacity to 

an individual or individuals involved in the 

formulation and effectuation of mana g e m e n t policies 

in the field of labor relations. (HEW, SSA, 

District Off., Minneapolis, Minn., A/S L M R No. 621)

Personnel Assistant excluded from unit as c o n ­

fidential employee. (IRS, A/SL M R No. 565)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

6-30-76 1

I
Confidential Employees (cont'd)

Secretaries assigned to the Sector M a nager and 

the Field Office Chiefs are confidential e m ­

ployees. (FAA, Airway Facilities Sector 37,

Tampa, Fla., A / S L M R No. 647)

Secretary to Administrative L a w Judge in Charge 

is confidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of 

H earings and Appeals, A/S L M R No. 625)

S ecretary Training Center Administrator excluded 

from unit as confidential employee. (iRS,

A / S L M R No. 565)

C o n s t r u c t i o n A n a l y s t Supervisor is supervisor. (HUD, FHA, 

Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A/S L M R No. 645)

C o n s t r u c t i o n (Cost) A n alyst is not mana g e m e n t official.

(HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. D.ak.,

A / S L M R No. 645)

Con s t r u c t i o n Cost Examiner is not management official.

(HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak.,

A / S L M R No. 645)

Course Developer-Instructors are not engaged in Federal 

personnel w o r k w i t h i n the meaning of Sec. 10(b)(2) of the 

Order. (iRS, N a t’l. Off., Washington, D.C. A/SLMR No. 630)

Course Developer-Instructors are not management officials 

but are resource persons whose recommendations are subject 

to extensive review before either acceptance or implementation and they are not individuals who actively part i c i ­

pate in the ultimate determination of w hat policy, in fact, 

will be. llRSy Nat'l. Off., Washington, D. C. A/SLMR No. 630)

D e n t i s t is professional employee. (VA C n t r . , Bath, N. Y . , 

A / S L M R No. 605)

Dist r i c t Clerk GS-5 is not supervisor. (U. S. Forest 

Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Employment Development Specialists excluded from unit as 

they are engaged in Federal personnel w o r k in other than 

a purely clerical capacity. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Engineering Equipment Operator Foreman. WS-9 is supervisor.

(U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida., 

A / S L M R No. 556)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

6-30-76 45
Federal Personnel W o r k

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Officer performs Federal p e r ­

sonnel w o r k in o ther than a purely clerical 

capacity. (HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., 

Fargo, N. Dak., A / S L M R No. 645)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

Cou r s e - D e v e l o p e r - I n s t r u c t o r s are n o t E n g a g e d 

in Federal personnel w o r k w i t h i n the m e a n i n g of ;

Sec. 10(b)(2) of the Order. (iRS, Nat'l. Off., :

Washington, D. C . , A / S L M R No. 630) ;('

4

E m p loyment D e v e l o p m e n t Specialists excluded J

from unit as they are engaged in Federal personnel I

w o r k in other than a purely clerical capacity. ^

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565) '

Personnel M a n a g e m e n t Specialists excluded from 

unit as they are engaged in Federal personnel 

w o r k in other than a purely clerical capacity.

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Fiscal A n a l y s t is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official. (IRS,

A / S L M R No. 565)

Forester, GS-9 is supeirvisor. (U. S. Forest Seirvice, Salmon 

National Forest, Salmon, Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

General Schedule

Uni t Appropriate

General Schedule Engineering Technicians m a y 

remain in W B unit despite m e r i t promotion from 

W B to GS status. (Air Force, Aeronautical Systems 

D i v . , A i r Force Systems Command, W r i g h t -Patterson 

AFB, Ohio, A / S L M R No. 590)

Guards

(See also 10 32 0 0 , "Qualifications to R e p r e s e n t Specified 

C ategories of Employees)

H e a v y Mobile Equipment Mechanic^ WG-11 is not supervisor.

(U. S. Fore s t Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Industrial Engineer is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official. (IRS,

A / S L M R No. 565)

46 6-30-76
Loan Specialist (Realty) is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official.

(HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak.,

A / S L M R No. 645)

M a n a g e m e n t A n a l y s t is n o t man a g e m e n t official. (IRS,

A / S L M R No. 565)

M a n a g e m e n t Official

(See also; 05 04 00, "Definitions")

Analysts in the M a n agement and Resources Branch 

are n o t m a n a g e m e n t officials but are resource 

persons whose recommendations are subject to 

extensive review before either acceptance or 

implementation and they are not individuals who 

actively participate in the ultimate det e r m i n a ­

tion of w h a t policy, in fact, will be. (iRS,

Nat'l. Off., Washington, D.C., A/S L M R No. 630)

Analysts in the Revenue Accounting and Processing 

Branch are not mana g e m e n t officials but are r e ­

source persons whose recommendations are subject 

to extensive review before either acceptance or 

implementation and they are not individuals who 

actively participate in the ultimate d e termination of w h a t policy, in fact, will be. (iRS,

Nat'l. Off., Washington, D.C., A/S L M R No. 630)

Budget Analyst is not management off'cial. (IRS, 

A / S L M R No. 5 6 5 ; HEW, Off. of the Secretary, H q . , 

A /SL M R No. 596)

Chemist is not management official. (Energy 

R esearch and Development A d m . , H q . , A/SLMR No. 634)

Computer Systems Analysts are n o t management 

officials but are resource persons whose r e c ommendations are subject to extensive review before 

either acceptance or implementation and they are 

n o t individuals who actively participate in the 

ultimate determination of w hat policy, in fact, 

will be. (IRS, Nat'l. Off., Washington, D. C . , 

A/S L M R No. 630)

Construction (Cost)Analyst is n o t m anagement 

official. (HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring O f f ., Fargo,

N. Dak., A/SLMR No. 645)

C onstruction Cost Examiner is not management 

official. (HUD, FHA, Farg^o Insuring Off.,

Fargo, N. Dak. , A/SLMR No. 645)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

----- 47
M a n a g e m e n t O fficial (cont*d)

Course Developer-I n s t r u c t o r s are n o t m a n a g e m e n t 

officials but are resource persons w hose r e c o m m e n ­

dations are subject to extensive rev i e w before 

either acceptance or implementation and they are 

n o t i n dividuals who actively participate in the 

d eterm i n a t i o n of w h a t policy, in fact, wil l be.

(IRS, Nat'l. Off., Washington, D . C . , A / S L M R No. 630)

Fiscal A n a l y s t is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official. (iRS, 

A / S L M R No. 565)

Industrial Engineer is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official.

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

L oan Specialist (Realty) is n o t m a n a g e m e n t 

official. (HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo,

N. Dak., A / S L M R No. 645)

M a n a g e m e n t A n a l y s t is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official.

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

O perations Analysts are n o t m a n a g e m e n t officials 

w here they do n o t have the authority to make, or 

influence effectively, A c t i v i t y policies w i t h 

respect to personnel, procedures, or programs 

b ut rather serve as experts or resource persons 

rendering resource information or recommendations 

w i t h respect to the implementation of existing 

policies. (HEW, SSA, D istrict Off., Minneapolis, 

M i n n . , A / S L M R No. 621)

Regional A n alyst is n o t m a n a g e m e n t official.

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Regional A n a l y s t is m a n a g e m e n t official. (IRS, 

A / S L M R No. 565)

Senior Mana g e m e n t A n a l y s t is not m a n a g e m e n t 

official. (IRS, A/SL M R No. 565)

Senior Physicist is not m a nagement official.

(Energy R e s e a r c h and D evelopment A d m . , H q . ,

A / S L M R No. 634)

Senior Regional Analyst is not management 

official. (IRS, A/SL M R No. 565)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

48 6-30-76
M ana g e m e n t Official (cont*d)

Senior Regional A n alyst is m a n a g e m e n t official. 

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Senior Regional Analyst A u d i t is not m a n a g e m e n t 

official. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Senior Technical Assistant is n o t m a n a g e m e n t 

official. (Energy R esearch and Development 

Adm., Hq., A/S L M R No. 634)

Medical T e c h n ologist is professional employee. (VA 

W a d s w o r t h Hosp. C n t r . , A/S L M R No. 5 4 6 ; V A Hosp., Palo 

Alto, Cal., A / S L M R No. 552; V A Hosp., San Francisco, Cal., 

A / S L M R No. 553)

Operations Analysts are not confidential employees and do 

n o t serve in a confidential capacity to an individual or 

individuals involved in the formulation and effectuation 

of m a n a g e m e n t policies in the field of labor relations.

(HEW, SSA, District Off., Minneapolis, Minn., A/SLMR No. 621)

Operations Analysts are n o t m a n agement officials where 

they do not have the authority to make, or influence 

effectively. Activity policies wit h respect to.personnel, 

procedures, or programs but rather serve as experts or 

resource persons rendering resource information or recommen d a t i o n s w ith respect to the implementation of existing 

policies. (HEW, SSA, District Off., Minneapolis, Minn., 

A / S L M R No. 621)

Personnel Assistant excluded from unit as confidential 

employee. (IRS, A/SL M R No. 565)

Personnel Management Specialists excluded from unit as 

they are engaged in Federal personnel w o r k in other than 

a purely clerical capacity. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Physician is professional employee. (VA Cntr., Bath, N . Y . , 

A/S L M R No. 605)

Police

(See "Guards")

Production Controller. GS-12 is supeirvisor. (Navy,

Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, Long 

Beach, Cal., A/S L M R No. 594)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

, 6-30-76 49
50

Professional and N o n - Professional Employees 

U n i t Appropriate

Uni t of all nonprofessionals, as petitioned for, 

found to be appropriate, even though A c t i v i t y 

argued that only a m i x e d unit was appropriate 

based on the community of interest of p r o f e s s i o n a l s 

and nonprofessionals, because Sec. 10(b)(4) r e ­

quires a self-determination election for p r o f e s ­

sionals which, in turn, requires separate d e t e r ­

m i n a t i o n s of appropriateness for professionals 

and nonprofe s s i o n a l s in the event professionals 

opt out. (Defense M a pping Agency Aerospace C n t r . , 

St. Louis, Mo., A / S L M R No. 569)

A c t ivity-wide unit of all professional and n o n ­

professional employees, including canteen employees 

but excluding cemetery employees, at Veterans 

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Center held appropriate. (VA Cntr., 

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Professional Employees, Occupations

C haplain is professional employee. (VA Cntr.,

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

D e ntist is professional employee. (VA Cntr.,

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Medical Tech n o l o g i s t is professional employee.

(VA W a d s w o r t h Hosp. Cntr., A / S L M R No. 5 4 6 ; V A 

Hosp., Palo Alto, Cal., A/SL M R No. 5 5 2 ; V A Hosp., 

San Francisco, Cal., A / S L M R No. 553)

Physician is professional employee. (VA Cntr,, 

Bath, N. Y . , A / S L M R No. 605)

Psychologist is professional employee. (VA 

Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A / S L M R No. 605)

R e g istered Nurse is professional employee. (VA 

Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A/SLMR No. 605)

Social Psychologist is professional employee.

(VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A / S L M R No. 605)

Social W o r k e r is professional employee. (VA 

Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A/SL M R No. 605)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Bnployee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

6-30-76
l 0 ' ^ 2 0 0 0 ’"■■ ^..^

Professional Employees, Occupations (cont*d)

Speech Pathologist is professional employee.

(VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A/S L M R No. 605)

Vocational Rehabilitation Specialist is p r o ­

fessional employee. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y., 

A/S L M R No. 605)

Psychologist is professional employee. (VA Cntr., Bath,

N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Regional Analyst is not man a g e m e n t official. (IRS,

A/S L M R No. 565)

Regional Analyst is m a nagement official. (iRS,

A / S L M R No. 565)

Registered Nurse is professional employee. (VA Cntr.,

Bath, N. Y., A/SLMR No. 605)

Seasonal Employees

(See; 20 20 00 "Temporary Employees")

Secretary

(See: 20 20 00 "Confidential Employees")

Secretaries assigned to the Sector Manager and the Field 

Office Chiefs are confidential employees. (Federal A v i a ­

tion A d m . , Airway Facilities Sector 37, Tampa, Fla.,

A/S L M R No. 647)

Secretary to Administrative L a w Judge in Charge is confidential employee. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of Hearings and 

Appeals, A/SLMR No. 625)

Secretary Training Center Administrator excluded from unit 

as confidential employee. (IRS, A/S L M R No. 565)

Senior Management Analyst is not m a n agement official. (iRS, 

A/S L M R No. 565)

Senior Physicist is not management official. (Energy 

Research and Development Adm., H q . , A/S L M R No. 634)

Senior Regional Analyst is not management official. (iRS, 

A/SLMR No. 565)

Senior Regional Analyst is management official. (iRS, 

A/S L M R No. 565)

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

6-30-76 _ 51

0 ^-
52

Senior R egional A n a l y s t Audit is not m a n a g e m e n t official.

(IRS, A / S L M R No. 565)

Senior Technical A s s i s t a n t is not m a n a g e m e n t official.

(Energy R e s e a r c h and D e v e l o p m e n t A d m . , H q . , A / S L M R No. 634)

Social P s y c h ologist is professional employee. (yA C n t r . ,

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Social W o r k e r is professional employee. (VA C n t r . , Bath,

N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Soil Scientist, GS-11 is not supervisor. (U. S. Forest 

Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, I d a . , A / S L M R No. 556)

Speech P a thologist is professional employee. (VA Cntr.,

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

Supervisors

(See also: 05 04 00 ’’Definitions"; 20 20 0 0 . "Fir e f i g h t e r s”, 

"Management Officials", "Teachers" and "Nurses")

Administrative Assistant. A d ministrative Services 

and Resources, GS-9 is supervisor. (U. S. Forest 

Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida., 

A/ S L M R No. 556)

Administrative Coordinator for N u rsing is s u pervisor. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A / S L M R No. 605)

Auditor-in-Charge is n o t supervisor. (Defense 

Contract Audit Agency, Chicago Region, Chicago,

1 1 1 . , A / S L M R No. 610)

Budget and Accounting Officer, GS-12 is supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National 

Forest, Salmon, Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Civil Engineer, GS~11 is supervisor. (U. S.

Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Construction A n alyst Supervisor is supervisor.

(HUD, FHA, Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., 

A/S L M R No. 645)

District Clerk, GS-5 is n o t supervisor. (U. S. 

Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

20 20 00

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont*d)

6-30-76
m

20 20 GO

Supervisors (cont*d)

Engineering Equipment O p e r a t o r Foreman, W S-9 is 

supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service, Salmon 

National Forest, Salmon, Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Forester, GS-9 is supervisor. (U. S. F orest 

Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida., 

A / S L M R No. 556)

H eavy Mobile Equipment Mechanic, WG-11 is n ot 

supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service, Salmon 

National Forest, Salmon, Ida., A / S L M R No. 556)

Production Controller, GS-12 is supervisor.

(Navy, Supervisor of Shipbuilding, C onversion 

and Repair, Long Beach, Cal., A / S L M R No. 594)

Soil Scientist, GS-11 is not supervisor. (U. S. 

Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

Ida., A/S L M R No. 556)

Supervisory Appraiser is supervisor. (HUD, FHA, 

Fargo Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A / S L M R No. 645)

Supervisory Clerk-Stenographer, GS-5 is not 

supervisor. (U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National 

Forest, Salmon, Ida., A/S L M R No. 556)

Supervisory Forest Technician, GS-7 is supervisor. 

(U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, 

Salmon, Ida., A/SL M R No. 556)

Theatre Specialist is not supervisor. (Army,

H q . , Ft. Carson and H q . , Fourth Infantry Div. 

(Mechanical), A/SL M R No. 544)

Supervisory Appraiser is supervisor. (HUD, FHA, Fargo 

Insuring Off., Fargo, N. Dak., A/SLMR No. 645)

Supervisory Clerk-Stenographer, GS-5 is n o t supervisor.

(U. S. Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

I d a . , A/SLMR No. 556)

Supervisory Forest Technician, GS-7 is supervisor. (U. S. 

Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida.,

A /S L M R No. 556)

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

6-30-76 53
T e m p o r a r y Employees

T e m p o r a r y employees excluded from unit w h ere 

it w a s found that they do n o t have a reasonable 

e x p ectancy of continued employment. (VA C n t r . , 

Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

C hap l a i n employed on part-time basis n o t to 

exceed 20 hours per week, whose duties are 

e s sentially the same as approximately 5 p e r ­

m a n e n t full-time chaplains and 2 p e rmanent 

part-time chaplains, and w h o s e appointment is 

for 1-year periods subject to renewal at the 

end of each fiscal year, included in unit i n a s ­

mu c h as (1) position authorized as continuing 

position; (2) incumbent's appointment recently 

approved for another year; and thus (3) temporary 

part-time chaplain has reasonable expectancy of 

continued emplojmient for a substantial period of 

time. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y . , A / S L M R No. 605)

Theatre Specialist is n o t supervisor. (Army, H q . , Ft. 

Carson and H q . , Fourth Infantry Div. (Mechanical),

A / S L M R No. 544

Vocational Rehabili t a t i o n Specialist is professional 

employee. (VA Cntr., Bath, N. Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

20 24 00 Post-Decisional Intervention, Showing of Interest and 

Withdrawal

20 24 04 Posting of Notice of Unit Dete r m i n a t i o n

Where unit found appropriate is substantially 

different from that sought, A/S directed p o s t ­

ing of a Notice of Unit Determ i n a t i o n in areas 

where notices are n ormally posted affecting 

employees eligible to vote, p ursuant to w h i c h 

any labor organization m a y seek intervention, 

in accordance w i t h Sec. 202.5 of Regs, for 

sole purpose of appearing on ballot. (FAA, 

and FAA, Eastern Region, A / S L M R No. 600)

20 24 04

20 20 00 Employee Categories and Classifications (cont'd)

54 6-30-76
20 24 12

20 24 00 Post-Decisional Intervention, Showing of Interest and 

W i t hdrawal (cont*d)

20 24 08 Showing of Interest

Where election is directed in unit larger than 

that sought, but record is unclear as to adequacy 

of Petitioner's showing of interest in unit 

found appropriate, before proceeding to election, 

A A is directed to reevaluate showing of interest, 

and if inadequate, petition is to be dismissed. 

(FAA and FAA, Eastern Region, A / S L M R No. 600)

20 24 12 O pportunity to W i t h d r a w

No Entries

6-30-76 55
25 08 08

25 00 00 R E P R E S E N T A T I O N E LECTION A N D POS T E LECTION STAGES 

25 04 00 Voting Procedures

25 04 04 Professionals

Where A/S made no findings c o n cerning the 

p rofessional status of c e rtain employee c l a s ­

sifications because of lack of record evidence, 

A/S indicated that the employees in such c l a s ­

sifications could vote as professionals subject 

to challenge in the ele c t i o n he directed. (VA 

Cntr., Bath, N.Y., A / S L M R No. 605)

25 04 08 S e l f -Determination

S elf-det e r m i n a t i o n elections wer e granted where 

a b a r gaining h i story was in existence among 

less comprehensive units w i t h i n nation-wide 

u nit found appropriate. In addition, a selfdetermination e lection was granted at the r e ­

gional level in w h i c h the Co-Petitioner at 

the regional level sought to represent in one 

u ni t the employees currently r e presented by 

the nation-wide Co-Petitioner in two units under 

one n e g otiated agreement, (FAA and FAA, Eastern 

Region, A / S L M R No. 600)

25 04 12 Role of Observers 

No Entries 

25 04 16 Severance 

No Entries

25 08 00 Objections

25 08 04 Under EO 10988 

No Entries 

25 08 08 Procedure 

No Entries

6-30-76
25 12 04

A/s found that leaflet distributed by P e t i ­

tioner two days prior to the ele c t i o n c o n ­

tained gross m isrepresentations of a m a t erial 

fact. However, based on ALJ's c r e d ibility 

findings and other record evidence, the A /S 

c oncluded that the Intervenor had ample time 

to prepare and distribute an effective reply. 

(Naval Air Rewo r k Facility, Naval Air Sta., 

Jacksonville, Fla., A / S L M R No. 613)

25 08 00 Objections (Cont'd)

25 08 12 Timing of Objectionable Conduct

Rep o r t No. 58 does not preclude c o n s i d eration 

of conduct occurring before petition was filed 

u nder circumstances of this case as Sec. 19(a)(3) 

I finding of improper assistance in obtaining the

showing indicated that had investigation of 

challenge to val i d i t y of showing of interest 

b e e n conducted, the election w o u l d have nev e r 

been held. Therefore, election results were 

set aside and petition was dismissed. (Navy,

Nav y Commissary Store Complex, Oakland, A / S L M R 

No. 654)

o'c

: Dv

, UU..

25 08 16 Age n c y Rules on Campaigning 

No Entries 

25 08 20 Campaign Communications 

No Entries 

25 08 24 Promises of Benefit 

No Entries 

25 08 28 Conduct of Election 

No Entries 

25 08 32 Age n c y Neutrality 

No Entries

25 12 00 Challenges

25 12 04 Eligibility of Employees

(See also; 20 20 0 0 , "Employee Categories 

and Classifications")

No Entries

6-30-76
25 12 08 Questions Concerning Ballot

N o Entries

25 12 12 Timing of Challenge

No Entries

25 16 00 Cert i f i c a t i o n

D e c e r t i f i c a t i o n of the Complainant, exclusive r e p r e ­

sentative, during pendency of ULP proceeding rendered 

m o o t the issues of the complaint. (Dept, of Agric.,

Forest Service, Pacific Southwest and Range Experiment 

Sta., Berkeley, Cal,, A / S L M R No. 573)

25 20 00 Clarification of Unit

(See also; 10 04 16, "Types of Petitions: Procedure, 

CU").

U ni t description clarified to include in unit exclusions 

the c ategory "confidential employees", and unit itself 

clarified to exclude the Clerk to the A r e a Supervisor 

in 45 Area Offices because p osition falls w i t h i n " confidential employees" category. (Dept, of the Treasury, 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Washington, D.C., 

A / S L M R No. 538)

Unit clarified (1) by including Physical Science T e c h ­

nicians in WB unit who had previously bee n included in 

WB unit prior to change in job title and change in 

method of compensation; (2) by excluding a Supervisory 

Supply Technician and Supervisory Firefighters w h o 

exercise supervisory authority as set forth under Sec.

2(c) of the Order; and (3) by excluding employees o p e r ­

ating, repairing, and maintaining cryptographic equipment 

w h o were excluded by Agency head under Sec. 3(b)(3) of 

the Order. (Navy, N o r f o l k Naval Shipyard, A / S L M R No. 547)

A/S affirmed Department of Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, District Office, Lakeview, O r e g o n , A / S L M R 

No. 212, by clarifying unit to include "seasonal s u p e r ­

visors" during portion of year w h e n they are n o t s u p e r ­

v is i n g seasonal employees, and exclude them w h i l e serving as supervisors during remaining portion of the year. 

(U.S. Forest Service, Salmon National Forest, Salmon,

Ida., A/SL M R No. 556)

25 20 00

25 12 00 Challenges (Gont'd)

6-30-76 58
------

25 20 00

P etition for c l a rification of unit dismissed as e m p l o y ­

ees at some thirteen dispensaries located at other f a c i l ­

ities found not to accrete to unit at Naval Hospital. 

(Navy, Philadelphia Naval Regional M e d i c a l Cntr., A / S L M R 

No. 558)

Petition for clarif i c a t i o n of unit dismissed inasmuch as 

the purpose of a CU petition is to clarify an existing, 

exclusively recognized unit, while the employees in the 

unit claimed in this CU petition are not currently r e p r e ­

sented in an exclusively recognized unit. Unit c l a i m ­

ed contained employees who had bee n represented by 

the NAGE previous to the deactivation of the activity 

and the a ddition of its physical facilities, functions, 

and some of its employees to another activity, but the 

A /S found that these employees do not constitute a r e c ­

ognizable and viable unit by themselves at this other 

activity, w h e r e i n employees had not been previously r e p r e ­

sented in an exclusively recognized unit. (U.S. Coast 

G uard Air Sta., Non-Appropriated Fund Activity, Cape Cod, 

Mass., A/S L M R No. 561)

Unit clarified by excluding an employee classified as 

Administrative Aide or Administrative Clerk in each 

District and Branch Office. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of Field 

Operations, Boston Region, District and Branch Offices, 

A / S L M R No. 562)

A/C petition seeking to designate a change in o r g a n i z a ­

tional title of Acti v i t y is granted w h e r e parties had 

stipulated to the change in organizational title and 

where there was no evidence to indicate that such stipulation was improper, (Air Force, Aeronautical Systems 

Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright - P a t t e r s o n 

AFB, Ohio, A / S L M R No. 590)

Following transfer of function from one base to another, 

seven miles away, employees involved in the transfer 

continued to perform job functions similar to those 

previously performed, under similar w o r k i n g conditions. 

Established bargaining unit clarified to include transferred functional group. (Arizona Air Nat'l. Guard, 

Phoenix, Ariz., A / S L M R No. 593)

Unit clarified by including two budget analysts whe r e 

their official duties did n o t w a r r a n t their d e sig25 20 00 Clarification of Unit (Cont'd)

59 6-30-76

i'r
25 20 00

n a t i o n as m a n a g e m e n t officials and w h e r e the presence 

of one b u d g e t a n alyst on the m a n agement neg o t i a t i n g 

t ea m did n o t extend to active participation in the 

ne g o t i a t i n g process. (HEW, Off. of the Secretary, Hq., 

A / S L M R No. 596)

Un i t clarified, p ursuant to CU Petition, by including 

employees designated as S e c r etary to the Admini s t r a t i v e 

L a w Judge In Charge in e ach of three Bureau of Hearings 

and A p peals (BHA) offices of the A c t i v i t y in Puerto Rico, 

A/s found that the secretaries h e r e i n are confidential 

employees inasmuch as they act in a c o n f i dential capacity 

to an official who, in his capa c i t y as head of a B H A 

Office, is involved in effectuating labor m a n a g e m e n t 

relations. (HEW, SSA, Bureau of Hearings and Appeals, 

A / S L M R No. 625)

CU petition dismissed where A/S found no basis for c o n ­

cluding claimed employees (guards) had a ccreted into the 

IFPTE's existing unit f rom w h i c h they had b e e n specifically 

excluded w h e n the unit was certified. (Navy, Naval Support Activity, Long Beach, Cal., A / S L M R No. 629)

Course Developer-Instruetors. Anal y s t s and Computer 

Systems Analysts should be included in the exclusively 

r e c ognized unit inasmuch as they are n o t m a n a g e m e n t 

officials, but are resource persons w h o do n o t actively 

participate in the ultimate d e t ermination of w h a t policy, 

in fact, wil l be. (IRS, Nat'l. Off., Washington, D.C., 

A / S L M R No. 630)

Peti t i o n seeking to include in a certified unit all professional and n onprofessional employees of a n e w l y e s tablished office was dismissed inasmuch as the e m ployment of 

70 individuals needed to fulfill projected staffing r e ­

quirements was speculative. Consequently, the A/S found 

that it w o u l d not effectuate the purposes and policies 

of the Order to amend a c e r tification and c l arify a unit 

where, as here, the employees sought to be added to the 

certified unit had not, in fact, bee n hired. (HEW,

Social aud Rehabilitation Service, Central Off., W a s h ­

ington, D.C., A / S L M R No, 632)

Unit clarified following reorganizations in June 1973 

and August 1974 w h e r e i n employees of the Office of 

the A s s i stant Secretary of Health (OASH) no longer 

shared a community of interest w i t h Office of Secretary

25 20 00 Clarification of Unit (Cont'd)

6-30-76 60
employees in the existing unit. Also, A / S found that 

the continued inclusion of G ASH employees in the e x i s t ­

ing unit w o u l d n o t promote effective dealings and e f ­

ficiency of agency operations. (HEW, Off. of Secretary, 

Hq., A / S L M R No. 648)

R e o r g a n i s a t i o n w h i c h occurred was primarily administra- 

■ tive and did n o t so thoroughly combine and integrate

- two separate units as to require a finding that one

u nit had lost its independent identity. On this basis, 

and in light of the fact that a disclaimer of interest 

q was filed for one of the units, the CU petition was

ordered dismissed and it w a s concluded that the e m p l o y ­

ees in the disclaimed uni t w ere presently unrepresented. 

(Army, Ft. McPherson, Ga., A / S L M R No. 655)

25 24 00 A m e n d m e n t of Recogn i t i o n or Certification

Design a t i o n of A c t i v i t y in prior certif i c a t i o n is 

Changed to reflect the deactivation of the Activity's 

vj,. operations at one of its two locations. (U.S. Coast

Guard Air Sta., Non-Appro p r i a t e d Fund Activity, Cape Cod, 

Mass., A / S L M R No. 561)

r

,..1. Evidence did not establish that there w a s an effective

change of affiliation from certified local to another.

1. Officers of certified local opposed to mer g e r of two

locals; there was no meeting of mem b e r s h i p of certified 

local to consider issue of change of affili a t i o n and 

no vote was taken on affiliation question. Petition 

w as dismissed. (Navy, Supervisor of Shipbuilding, 

Conversion and Repair, 8th Naval District, N e w Orleans, 

La., A / S L M R No. 572)

Certification amended to reflect change in name of 

A c t i v i t y and changes precipitated by reorganization, 

i/ ;"' (Navy, Naval Undersea C n t r . , San Diego, Cal., A / S L M R

No. 584)

Petition seeking to include in a certified unit all 

professional and nonprofessional employees of a new l y 

fej-' established office was dismissed inasmuch as the e m p l o y ­

m e n t of 70 individuals needed to fulfill projected 

staffing requirements was speculative. Consequently,

9'3 the A/S found that it w ould n o t effectuate the purposes

f and policies of the Order to amend a c e r t ification and

c l a rify a unit where, as here, the employees sought to 

t&vj be added to the certified unit had not, in fact, b e e n

25 24 00

25 20 00 Clarification of Unit (Cont'd)

61 6-30-76
25 24 00

hired, (HEW, Social and R e h a b i litation Service, 

Central Off., Washington, D.C,, A / S L M R No. 632)

A C p e t i t i o n is n o t a ppropriate v e hicle to r e f l e c t a 

r e d e l e g a t i o n of a u t h o r i t y f r o m the Commander, F i f t h 

U.S. A r m y to all U n i t e d States A r m y Reseirve Command 

Commanders, w h o w e r e further ordered to designate a 

seicvicing C i v i l i a n P e r s o n n e l Office to act for them 

in carrying out the civi l i a n personnel program. 

(Army, Ft. McCoy, Sparta, Wise., A / S L M R No. 638}

25 24 00 Amendment of Recognition or Certification (Gont'd)

6-30-76 62
jr'
30 12 04

30 04 00 Requ i s i t e s for Charges and Complaints

In a g r e e m e n t w i t h ALJ, A/S dismissed complaint, finding 

that in order to p r e s e n t an issue of alleged v i o l a t i o n 

of Order for determination, clearly separate and distinct 

causes of act i o n m u s t be s e p arately and a f f i r m a t i v e l y 

a l l e g e d in the complaint.

A / s rejected argu m e n t of C o m p l a i n a n t that pre-complai n t charge should be read in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h complaint 

so as to incorporate in compl a i n t specific allegations 

c o n t a i n e d in the charge. Noting that existing procedure 

of filing p r e - c o m p l a i n t charges dir e c t l y w i t h party charged 

had its inception in the e x p r e s s e d pol i c y of the Study 

Committee's R e p o r t and R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s , the A/S expressed 

the v i e w that to construe a c o m p laint as aut o m a t i c a l l y 

containing the allegations c o n t ained in the pre-complaint 

charge w o u l d render the p r e scribed process of informal 

reso l u t i o n meaningless. (Air Force, 380th Combat Support 

Group, P l a t t s b u r g h AFB, N.Y., A / S L M R No. 557)

A L J dismissed as u ntimely a l leged violation, first raised 

a t the hearing, that occurred more than nine months prior 

to the filing of the complaint. (GSA, R e g i o n 3, PBS, 

C e ntral Support Field Off., A / S L M R No. 583)

A / S adopted A L J recommen d a t i o n that events occurring 

after and more than nine months prior to the filing of the 

complaint n o t be considered as giving rise to a ULP under 

the complaint. (4392d Aerospace Support Group, Vandenberg 

AFB, Cal., A / S L M R No. 623)

A/s adopted ALJ's findings that the U L P c o m p l a i n t w a s 

timely filed and that the filing of the c o m p l a i n t in the 

Wa s h i n g t o n Area Office was reasonable as the issue may 

have involved a policy of the n a t i o n a l office of the R e ­

spondent. (CSC, and IRS, Washington, D.C., A / S L M R No. 642)

30 08 00 Complaint Proceedings; Investigation Stage 

No Entries

30 12 00 Hearing

30 12 04 Rulings of A L J s

30 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; PROCEDURE

Allowing employees to make judgment for themselves as to w h e t h e r they are n e c e s s a r y wit6-30-76 64
30 20 00

nesses pur s u a n t to Sec. 206,7 of the Regs w o u l d 

b e disruptive of the orderly processes required 

to implement properly the EG, even if some of 

those judgments u l t i m a t e l y w e r e to be vindicated. 

The A/S n o t e d that the purposes of the EG w o u l d 

be served bet t e r if the parties adhered to the 

implicit mandate of Sec. 206.7 that prior a p ­

proval of a "Request for A p p earance of W i t ­

n e s s e s” be obtained before any employee is granted 

such official time and expenses as are described 

in Sec. 206.7(g) of the Regs. (Bellingham Flight 

Service Sta., FAA, N o r t hwest Region, DOT, B e l l i n g ­

ham, Wash., A/SL M R No. 597)

30 12 08 U n t i m e l y Amendments to Complaints

No Entries

30 12 12 Failure to Appear

N o Entries

30 12 16 P rejudicial Evidence

N o Entries

30 12 20 Technical Deficiencies

N o Entries

30 12 24 Evidence and Burden of Proof

' N o Entries

30 12 28 L a c k of Cooperation

No Entries

30 16 00 Post-Hearing

N o Entries

30 20 00 Stipulated Record

P ursuant to Sec. 206.5(b) of the Regs, A R D transferred 

case to the A/S for decision on the stipulations, exhibits 

and briefs. Provision was made in the Stipulation for the

30 12 04 RuliiiRS of ALJs (Cont'd)

65 6-30-76
in camera sub m i s s i o n of a document to the A/S, u p o n his 

request. The d ocument w a s requested and rece i v e d b y the 

A/S. (CSC, Washington, D.C., A / S L M R No. 640)

30 24 00 Employee Status; E f f e c t on Unfa i r Labor P ractices 

No Entries

30 28 00 Effe c t of Other P roceedings or Forums

A / S r e a f f i r m e d the pol i c y stated in R e p o r t N u m b e r 55 that 

w h i l e awa i t i n g the r e s o l u t i o n of a p e t i t i o n in w h i c h an 

act i v i t y has raised a good faith doubt as to the a p p r o ­

priateness of an existing unit following a reorganization, 

there is no o b l i g a t i o n on the part of the act i v i t y to 

ne g o t i a t e w i t h the exclusive representative. A l t h o u g h such 

a procedure existed at the time of the instant case, the 

Re-;pon.dent failed to file a timely R A petition. (DSA, D e ­

fense Prop e r t y Disposal Off., Aberdeen, Md., A / S L M R No. 615)

A/s found that a l leged v i o lations of a n e g o t i a t e d a g r e e ­

m e n t w h i c h c o ncern differing and a rguable interpretations 

of such agreement, as distin g u i s h e d f r o m a l leged actions 

w h i c h w o u l d constitute clear, uni l a t e r a l breaches 

of the agreement, are not deemed to be v i o l a t i v e of the 

Order and that, under the circumstances, the a g grieved 

party's remedy for such m a tters lies w i t h i n the grie/ance 

ma c h i n e r y of the neg o t i a t e d agreement, rather than through 

the unfair labor practice procedures. (Army, W a t e r v l i e t 

Arsenal, Watervliet, N.Y., A / S L M R No. 624)

Alle g a t i o n that R e s pondent viol a t e d Sec, 19(a)(1) and (6) 

of the Order by failing to m e e t and confer w i t h the C o m ­

plainant regarding the impact on unit employees of the 

contracting out of certain custodial services is rendered 

m oot where, subsequent to the filing of the complaint. 

Complainant affirmatively disclaimed interest in r e p r e ­

senting unit employees and, following the filing of a 

representation petition, another labor o r g a n i z a t i o n was 

elected as exclusive representative, (U.S, A r m y Tank 

Automotive Command, Warren, Mich,, A / S L M R No, 662)

30 32 00 M a j o r Policy Issue Raised 

No Entries

30 32 00

30 20 00 Stipulated Record (Cont*d)

6-30-76 66

35 04 00 General

35 04 04 Guidance or Directives of Civil Service 

Com m i s s i o n or A g e n c y

No Entries

35 04 08 W a i v e r of Rights Granted by Executive Order

A/S adopted ALJ finding that n e i t h e r past 

practice nor the n e gotiated agreement c onstituted a clear and unmistakable w a i v e r of the 

exclusive representative's right to bargain 

about such a fundamental m a t t e r as changes in 

wo r k i n g conditions. (U. S. A r m y Finance and 

A c counting C n t r . , Ft. Benjamin Harrison, 

Indianapolis, Ind., A / S L M R No. 651)

35 04 12 Mana g e m e n t Rights

No Entries

35 08 00 Section 19(a)(1)

No Entries

35 08 04 Interference

At a m e eting to discuss local union president's 

equal opportunity complaint, supervisor's 

statements, to the effect that some action should 

be taken by an arbitrator to stop h e r from filing 

charges, were not held to be violative of Sec. 

19(a)(1) of the Order. (Air Force, 4392d A e r o ­

space Support Group, V a n denberg AFB, C a l . ,

A/SLMR No. 537)

Pursuant to FLRC No. 73A-59, A/S found that 

Activity's refusal to grant union representative, 

in connection w i t h processing of an employee 

grievance, access to documents w h i c h reflected 

the evaluation panel's assessment of "Best 

Qualified" candidates violated Sec. 19(a)(1) 

and (6) of EO. (Dept, of Defense, State of 

Ne w Jersey, A/SLMR No. 539)

35 08 04

35 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES; AGENCY

6-30-76 68
35 08 04 —

35 08 04 Interference (cont*d)

R e s p o n d e n t vio l a t e d Sec. 19(a)(1) of the Order 

by its unilateral change in the terms and 

conditions of employment, as an impasse had not 

been reached in b a r gaining negotiations. (San 

Antonio A i r Logistics C n t r . , San A n tonio A i r 

M ateriel Are a (AFLC), A / S L M R No. 540)

Supervisors' i n t e rrogation of employee at 

m e e t i n g w i t h respect to h o w m a n y and w h i c h 

e mployees had signed r e presentation petition 

wa s improper i n t e rrogation and unwarranted 

intrusion into fellow employees' union activities. 

(Federal Energy A d m . , Reg i o n IV, Atlanta, G a . , 

A / S L M R No. 541)

Act i v i t y ' s w i t hdrawal of Complainant's r e c o g ­

n i t i o n for certain employees following r e o r g a n i ­

zation constituted v i o l a t i o n of Sec. 19(a)(1) of 

the O r d e r where, as a co-employer, it had an 

obligation to continue such recognition. (AAFES, 

South Texas Area Exchange, Lackland AFB, Tex., 

A / S L M R No. 542)

A/S found that Respondent's threat to suspend 

an employee in retaliation for that employee's 

involvement in the distribution of union 

literature, w h i c h the A/S found to be protected 

activity, violated Sec. 19(a)(1) for, although 

the R e s pondent did not carry out its threat, 

the threat of suspension had the effect of 

improperly interfering with, restraining, or 

coercing the employee in the exercise of activity 

protected by the Order. (Navy, Naval A i r R e ­

w o r k Facility, A/SLMR No. 543)

Acti v i t y did not violate Sec. 19(a)(1) w h e n it 

informed the representative of a probationary 

employee that, as a representative, he could 

remain at the m e e t i n g involved (found to be 

"formal" w i t h i n the m e a n i n g of Sec. 10(e)) only 

as an "observer", because, in fact, the employee's 

representative did participate in the discussion 

w h e n he want e d to and was not prevented from 

doing so by management. (Navy, N o r f o l k Naval 

Shipyard, A / S L M R No. 548)

69 6-30-76
R e s p o n d e n t did n o t violate Sec. 19(a)(1) by 

r emoving an employee who w a s promoted to a 

supervisory pos i t i o n from dues w i t h h o l d i n g 

w i t h o u t c o n s ultation w i t h the exclusive r e ­

presentative. (U. S. Mar i n e Corps A i r S t a . ,

El Toro, A / S L M R No. 560)

FLRC issued its D e c i s i o n on Appeal, FLRC No. 

74A-95, in w h i c h it hel d that the A/S finding 

of a v i o l a t i o n of Sec. 19(a)(1) in A / S L M R No. 

457, w a s inc o n s i s t e n t w i t h the purp o s e s of the 

Order. FLRC set aside A/S d ecision in 

A / S L M R No. 457 and remanded the case to h i m for 

appropriate action. A/S issued a Supplemental 

Deci s i o n and Order d i s missing the case in its 

entirety. (NASA, Washington, D. C . , and Lyndon 

B. J o hnson Space Center (NASA), Houston, Tex., 

A / S L M R No. 566)

A/S found evidence i n s u fficient to establish 

that (1) Act i v i t y ' s failure to assign overtime 

to an employee w a s m o t i v a t e d by a nti-union 

considerations or (2) that it w a s based on the 

employee's filing of a complaint or giving 

testimony under the Order. (Navy, Mar e Island 

Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, Cal., A / S L M R No. 570)

No v i o l a t i o n of Sec. 19(a)(1) found w here A/S 

advised a d m i nistratively that Compla i n a n t had 

b een decertified as the exclusive representative 

thus rendering m o o t the issues of the complaint. 

However, A/S did n o t adopt the rationale of the 

AL J that the Compla i n a n t ' s request for evaluation records w a s substantially b r oader than 

that w h i c h the FLRC h eld that an activity would 

be required to produce, and that, therefore, 

the bur d e n shifted to the Complainant, after the 

denial of the request in t o t o , to r e quest the 

eva l u a t i o n records in "sanitized" form. (Dept, 

of Agric., Forest Service, Pacific Southwest 

and Range Experiment Sta., Berkeley, Cal., 

A / S L M R No. 573)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (c o n t 'd )

6-30-76 70
35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont'd)

Acti v i t y ' s refusal to enter into n e g o t i a t i o n s 

w i t h incumbent exclusive representative for 

n e w agreement not viola t i v e of Sec. 19(a)(1) 

w h e r e valid Q C R raised w i t h respect to por t i o n 

of existing uni t by filing of peti t i o n by 

another union. (Air Force, H q . , 31st Combat 

Support Group, Homestead AFB, Homestead, Fla., 

A / S L M R No. 574)

T e m p o r a r y suspension by Act i v i t y of the Plan 

of the Day (POD) was n o t violative where (1) 

the A c t i v i t y did accommodate the union w i t h 

respect to its concern over the listing of 

v a c a n c y announcements by extending the listing 

of those w h i c h w o u l d have appeared in the POD 

during its suspension; and (2) public a t i o n w as 

resumed w i t h o u t substantial change. (Navy,

Naval Weapons S t a . , Concord, C a l . , A / S L M R No. 577)

R es p o n d e n t did n o t violate Sections 19(a)(1) and 

(2) of the Order by suspending the NFFE local 

president for a safety v i o l ation w here (1) 

safety w a s the only concern of the supervisor 

who proposed the suspension; (2) the R espondent 

had n o t penalized or reprimanded NFFE local 

officers for past labor relations activities; 

and (3) it did not appear that similar conduct 

of other employees had been or w o u l d be c ondoned or allowed by the Respondent. (Air Force, 

Hq., 31st Combat Support Group (TAC), Homestead 

AFB, Fla., A / S L M R No. 578)

A ct i v i t y did n o t violate Sections 19(a)(1) and

(2) of the Order by failing to promote the C o m ­

plainant where (1) the subjective judgment of 

the official responsible for promotions d e t e r ­

m i n e d who would be promoted; (2) animus or 

other discriminatory motive concerning the 

C omplainant's union activities was not shown;

(3) evidence was not adduced w h i c h could have 

afforded a comparison of the Activity's e v a l u a ­

tion of the w o r k performance of the Complainant 

and of the employees who were promoted; and (4) 

the evidence failed to establish that the C o m ­

plainant had been subjected to disparate treatment. (Fed. Deposit. Insurance Corp., N e w York 

Region, A/S L M R No. 580)

71 6-30-76
a / s adopted ALJ's conclusion that comp l a i n t 

should be dismissed based on finding that t e s t i ­

m o n y of w i t n e s s e s in support of complaint w a s 

eith e r h e a r s a y or based on events w ell b e y o n d 

the reach of the c omplaint,which alleged (1) 

that A c t i v i t y r e p eatedly passed over for p r o ­

m o t i o n an employee w h o w a s a pas t p r e s i d e n t 

and active m e m b e r of the Complainant; and (2) 

that a supervisor remarked to another employee 

during a p r o m o t i o n e v a l u a t i o n period that the 

subject employee's u n i o n activities h u r t him, 

no t his work. (VA Domiciliary, W h i t e City,

O r e . , A / S L M R No. 581)

Act i v i t y v i o l a t e d Sec. 19(a)(1) of EG w h e n its 

Group Superintendent, in a w r i t t e n d e c ision 

under the grievance procedure, threatened 

discipline against the g rievant and his r e p r e ­

sentative' for allegedly incorr e c t l y invoking 

the neg o t i a t e d agreement's grievance procedure, 

since such action could onl y have the c o n s e ­

quence of chilling the asser t i o n of contract 

rights by w a r n i n g those w h o w o u l d use such 

procedure that it m u s t be done w i t h o u t a flaw 

or else discipline could ensue. (Navy, Puget 

Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton, W a s h . ,

A / S L M R No. 582)

In remanding A / S L M R No. 432, the FLRC concluded 

that EG does n o t proscribe all communications 

w i t h unit employees over m a t t e r s relating to the 

collective bar g a i n i n g relationship. Rather, 

only those communications which, for example, 

amount to an attempt by agency m a n a g e m e n t to 

bypass the exclusive r e presentative and negotiate 

directly w i t h unit employees, or w h i c h urge 

employees to p u t pressure on the representative 

to take a certain course of action, or w h ich 

threaten or promise benefits to employees are 

v i o l ative of EG. Content, intent and effect of 

posted J a nuary 16, 1973 letter could reasonably 

be equated w i t h an attempt to bargain directly 

w i t h unit employees and to urge them to put 

pressure on the union to take certain actions in 

vi o l a t i o n of Sections 19(a)(1) and (6) of the 

Order. (Navy, Naval Air S t a . , Fallon, Nev., 

A / S L M R No. 587)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont'd)

6-30-76 ^2
Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-54, A/S revised 

certain portions of the remedial o r d e r in 

A / S L M R No. 400 w h i c h were i n c o n sistent w i t h 

FLRC finding that (1) Sec. 10(e) does n o t 

impose u pon a labor o r g a n i z a t i o n h o l d i n g e x ­

clusive r ecognition an o b l i g a t i o n to r e ­

p r esent a b a r gaining unit employee in an 

adverse action pro c e e d i n g until such time as 

the employee indicates a desire to choose his 

own representative; and (2) an agency's 

failure to recognize a labor o r g a nization's 

status as an employee's representative in an 

adverse action proceeding, until the employee 

designates another representative, does n ot 

constitute an unfair labor practice. (Naval 

Ordnance Sta., Louisville, K y . , A / S L M R No. 588)

A l t h o u g h the A/S found that, as a general rule, 

employees should receive prior approval before 

a ttempting to appear as w i t n esses p ursuant to 

Sec. 206.7 of the Regs, he also found that, 

under the circumstances h e r e i n , (1) the decision 

by the Agency's representative n o t to take 

e xception to the ALJ's ruling that the employee's 

appearance was n e c e s s a r y j (2) the Respondent's 

failure to abide by that ruling; and (3) the 

subsequent disciplining of the Complainant 

interfered w i t h the employee's Sec. 1(a) rights 

in v i o l ation of the Order. (Bellingham Flight 

Service S t a . , FAA, N o r t hwest Region, DOT, 

Bellingham, Wash., A / S L M R No. 597)

Whe n an A ctivity bargains w i t h the exclusive 

r epresentative regarding permissible subjects 

of bargaining, it is then bound by any a g r e e ­

m e n t w h i c h incorporates such matters. (The 

A dj u t a n t General, State of Illinois, 111.

A ir Nat'l. Guard, A / S L M R No. 598)

W h e n an Age n c y has sought specific changes in 

the first two versions of a n e gotiated a g r e e ­

m e n t in its review of the agreement pursuant 

to Sec. 15 of the Order, it is required to p e r ­

form the ministerial act of approving the 

agreement after the agreement has been brought 

into conformity wit h the specific changes 

enumerated by the Agency as neces s a r y to bring 

the agreement into conformity w ith laws, 

regulations, and policies. (The A d j utant 

General, State of Illinois, 111. Air Nat'l.

Guard, A/S L M R No. 598)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont*d)

73 6-30-76
A l t h o u g h the A c t i v i t y m a y have acted in 

app a r e n t good faith by n e g o t i a t i n g w i t h the 

exclusive representative in an effo r t to i n ­

corporate such changes as h a d b e e n req u e s t e d 

by the A g e n c y in two separate reviews, p u r s u a n t 

to its Sec. 15 authority, of the a g r e e m e n t 

en tered into by the parties at the local level, 

the Activity, nevertheless, v i o l a t e d Sections 

19(a)(1) and (6) of the EC by failing to implement 

the r e v i s e d a g r e ement w h i c h had b e e n b r o u g h t 

into conformity w i t h the changes sought by the 

Agency, at w h i c h time the a g r e e m e n t became 

valid and binding. (The A d j u t a n t General, State 

of Illinois, 111. A i r Nat?t. Guard,

A / S L M R No. 598)

A/S found that A g e n c y v i o l a t e d Sec. 19(a)(1) 

by directing A c t i v i t y to terminate differential 

pay, paid pur s u a n t to a r b i t r a t i o n awards.

(Naval A i r R e w o r k Facility, Pensacola, Fla.,

A / S L M R No. 608)

Alle g a t i o n that R e s p o n d e n t v i o l a t e d Sections 

19(a)(1) and (6) of the' O r d e r w h e n it failed 

to consult or negotiate w i t h respect to impact 

of transfer of fifteen employees from Portland 

to Van c o v e r is dismissed w h e r e (1) obligation 

was discharged w h e n another local w a s involved 

in m a n a g e m e n t decision m a k i n g process; and (2) 

no evidence w a s found that C o m p l a i n a n t had 

requested such bargaining. (DOT, Federal 

Hi ghway A d m . , Vancouver, Wash., A / S L M R No. 612)

A/S, in agreement w i t h ALJ, found that R e s p o n ­

dent v iolated Sec. 19(a)(1) by the conduct of 

its Dire c t o r of Personnel in p h y s i c a l l y r e ­

m o v i n g the C o m plainant's p r e s ident f rom a 

m e e t i n g at w h i c h he w a s r e p r e senting a unit 

employee. (U. S. Small Business Adm., Central 

Off., Washington, D. C . , A / S L M R No. 631)

A chief steward's right to represent employees 

no t impeded where (1) in each case of alleged 

har a s s m e n t the record revealed that valid 

grounds existed for the Respondent's actions; 

and (2) the Respondent's treatment of the 

chief steward's leave request was justified by 

h e r past use of emergency leave. (DSA, D C A S R 

Los Angeles, C a l . , A / S L M R No. 633)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont*d)

6-30-76 74
35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont'd)

An offer of a supervisory p o s i t i o n to a chief 

steward was a d e quately explained as esse n t i a l l y 

an administrative mistake, and n o t an attempt 

to "lure" her away from h e r union responsibilities. 

(DSA, DCASR, Los Angeles, Cal., A / S L M R No. 633)

Failure to allow the exclusive representative to 

be p r esent during interviews conducted w i t h unit 

employees is n o t violative where Civil Service 

Comm i s s i o n conducted interviews p ursuant to law 

and EG and w a s not, therefore, "Agency M a n a g e ­

m ent" w i t h i n the m e a n i n g of Sec. 2(f) of the EG 

w i t h respect to the unit employees. (CSC, 

Washington, D. C., A / S L M R No. 640)

Based on certain credited testimony, it was 

found that the termination of the p r obationary 

employee involved w a s based on the employee's 

unsatisf a c t o r y w o r k performance and w a s u n r e ­

lated to his p a r ticipation in union activities. 

(HUD, Des Moines Insuring Off., A / S L M R No. 641)

Denying the exclusive representative the right 

to be present during interviews conducted among 

unit employees found not violative where Civil 

Service Commission, w h i c h conducted the interviews 

pursuant to law and EG,was n o t "Agency M a n a g e ­

m ent" w i t h i n the m e a n i n g of Sec. 2(f) of the 

O r d e r and the Respondent-IRS's employee serving 

on the CSC evaluation team was under CSC supervision. (CSC, and IRS, Washington, D. C . ,

A / S L M R No. 642)

Refusal to negotiate a n e w collective bargaining 

agreement during pendency of a representation 

petition for a portion of exclusively recognized 

unit not violative of Sec. 19(a)(1). (Dept, of 

A g r i c . , Off. of Investigation and Off. of Audit, 

A / S L M R No. 643)

Statement of representative of R e s pondent made 

at a m e e t i n g to president of union council that 

he w a s n o t talking to h i m n o t violative of Sec. 

19(a)(1) where statement should have been i n t e r ­

preted as mer e l y informing president of council 

that conversation w a s between Respondent's r e presentative and representative of a constituent 

local of the union council. (Navy, Mare Island 

Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, Cal., A / S L M R No. 646)

6-30-76
a / s found that the Complainant's second vicep resident's rights were not interfered w i t h 

under Sec. 1(a) of the Order w h e n the R e s p o n ­

dent questioned her about a complaint that she 

had w r i t t e n to her Congressman. The A / S found 

that she had acted as an individual in w r i t i n g 

the letter and not as a representative of the 

Complainant. (Air Force, Lackland AFB, H e a d ­

quarters M i l i t a r y Trai n i n g Center (ATC), Tex., 

A / S L M R No. 652)

Pursuant to FLRC request that A/S reconsider and 

clarify his decision in A / S L M R No. 523 in light 

of FLRC's subsequent decision in Fallon (FLRC 

No. 74A-80)i A/s reaffirmed his previous finding 

of a Sec. 19(a)(1) v i o l a t i o n based on a supervisor's reading of a letter to employees which 

had p r e viously been sent from the exclusive representative to the Respondent. Such action indicated to employees that their confidential 

dealings w i t h their exclusive representative 

m i g h t not be kept confidential. Noted p a r t i ­

cularly by the A/S in his reaffirmation was the 

fact that the communication involved was judged 

independently, as required by F a l l o n , and a 

determination was mad e that such a breach of 

confidentiality w o u l d tend to dissuade employees 

from seeking union assistance. (VA, V A Data 

Processing C n t r . , Austin, Tex., A / S L M R No. 663)

Pursuant to FLRC request that A/S reconsider 

and clarify his decision in A / S L M R No. 523, 

in light of FLRC's subsequent decision in 

Vandenberg (FLRC No. 74A-77), A/S reaffirmed 

his previous finding of a Sec. 19(a)(1) v i o l a ­

tion based on a discrimi n a t o r y reporting r e ­

quirement placed on a union official by R e s p o n ­

dent's supervisor. In his reaffirmation, the 

A/s noted particularly the fact that (1) the 

conduct was not isolated, as the supervisor 

was involved in other ULP violations and allegations; (2) such a clear viola t i o n of a Sec.

1(a) right is not de minimis in nature; and (3) 

a remedial order was necessary to act as a 

deterrent to future similar occurrences. (VA,

V A Data Processing Cntr., Austin, Tex.,

A / S L M R No. 663)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont'd)

6-30-76 76
35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont*d)

Pursuant to FLRC request that A/S recons i d e r 

and clarify his dec i s i o n in A / S L M R No. 523, 

in light of FLRC's subsequent d ecision in 

Van d e n b e r g (FLRC No. 74A-77), A/S reaffirmed 

his previous finding of a Sec. 19(a)(1) v i o l a ­

tion based on the failure of the R e s p o n d e n t to 

take adequate m e a s u r e s to disassociate itself 

from the implic a t i o n that it was lending support 

to a d e c e r t i f i c a t i o n effort by allowing the use 

of its internal mail service for the return of 

signed decert i f i c a t i o n leaflets. In his r e ­

affirmation, A/S noted p a r t icularly that (1) 

each decert i f i c a t i o n leaflet had an internal 

m ail routing num b e r a l o n g s i d e each employee's 

name appearing on the leaflet; (2) one of the 

employees whose name appeared on the leaflet as 

a sponsor was found to be a supervisor; (3) at 

least some of the leaflets wer e returned through 

the internal m ail system; and (4) while some of 

those whose names appeared on the leaflet were 

admonished, none of those who used the internal 

mai l system to return a signed leaflet were so 

admonished. (VA, V A Data Processing C n t r . ,

Austin, Tex., A / S L M R No. 663)

Pursuant to FLRC request that A/S reconsider 

and clarify his decision in A / S L M R No. 523, in 

light of FLRC's subsequent decision in Fallon 

(FLRC No. 74A-80), A/S reversed his previous 

finding of Sec. 19(a)(1) and (6) violations 

based on a supervisor's circulation among 

certain employees of a m e m o r a n d u m pertaining to 

the status of the agreement b e tween the exclusive 

representative and the Respondent. Thus, under 

the FLRC's clarification in F a l l o n , n o t all direct 

communications pertaining to the collective 

b a rgaining relationship of the parties is deemed 

violative of the Order, and each communication 

m u s t be judged independently and a determination 

made as to w h e t h e r that communication is 

violative. Under this clarified standard, the 

a / s reversed his previous finding of a violation, 

noti n g particularly that the m e m o r a n d u m was an 

accurate reflection of the parties' positions 

regarding the negotiated agreement's status.

(VA, V A Data Processing C n t r . , Austin, T e x . ,

A / S L M R No. 663)

77 6-30-76
The a / s found that the C o mplainant failed to 

sustain the burden of proof in support of 

its allegations that its v i c e - p r e s i d e n t w a s 

discriminated against because of u n i o n c o n s i ­

derations. (Dept, of Defense, A i r N a t ' U Guard, 

147th F i ghter Group, Austin, Tex., A / S L M R No. 667)

A/S found Sec. 19(a)(1) v i o l a t i o n w h e r e ^ b y d iscontinuing dues deductions from m a i n t e n a n c e 

employees and later w i t h h o l d i n g dues payments 

from the Complainant, the R e s p o n d e n t interfered 

w i t h the obl i g a t i o n of the A c t i v i t y to h o n o r the 

terms and conditions of the e xisting agreement 

and to accord appropriate recognition to the 

Complainant. (Army and A i r Force Exchange Service, 

South Texas Area Exchange, Lackland, AFB, Tex., 

A / S L M R No. 669)

Age n c y and A c t i v i t y vio l a t e d Sec. 19(a)(1) by 

their 1974 professional appraisal of employee 

w here such appraisal included criti c i s m of the 

employee because he filed a grievance w i t h 

respect to comments about his han d l i n g of cases 

and because he filed a grievance w i t h respect 

to the assignment of compliance responsibilities 

to h i m in another proceeding. (National Labor 

R e l a tions Board, R e g i o n 17, and National Labor 

R e l a tions Board, A / S L M R No. 671)

The A/S found, contrary to the ALJ, that the 

Agen c y and Act i v i t y viol a t e d Sec. 19(a)(1) by 

comments included in 1974 professional appraisal 

of employee w h i c h wer e directed at employee's 

hand l i n g of his own unf a i r labor practice case 

against the A g e n c y and Activity, since such case 

had no connection w i t h the employee's w o r k related duties as an attorney and could inhibit 

such employee in the exercise of his rights to 

file and process unfair labor practice complaints 

and, therefore, could n o t be prop e r l y included 

in the appraisal. (National Labor R e l a tions Board, 

Reg i o n 17, and National Labor R e l a tions Board, 

A / S L M R No. 671)

35 08 04

35 08 04 Interference (cont'd)

6-30-76 78
35 12 00

35 08 04 Interference (cont*d)

A/S adopted A L J ' s finding that the unilateral 

can c e l l a t i o n of a m e e t i n g r oom w h i c h h a d p r e ­

v i o u s l y b een approved by an o fficial of m a n a g e ­

m e n t w a s a v i o l a t i o n of Sec. 19(a)(1) as it 

ne c e s s a r i l y d i scredited the exclusive r e p r e ­

sentative and thereby interfered w i t h employee 

rights assured by EG. (DOT, Off. of the S e c r e ­

tary, A / S L M R No. 672)

A/S adopted A LJ's finding that A c t i v i t y did n o t 

vi olate Sec. 19(a)(1) w h e n its supervisor 

suggested that a u nion official alter his e x i s t ­

ing practice and comply w i t h the terms of the n e ­

gotiated agreement w i t h regard to reporting his 

absences. (DOT, Off. of the Secretary,

A / S L M R No. 672)

35 08 08 Dist r i b u t i o n of Literature

A/S found, in agreement w i t h ALJ, that (1) 

d i s t r ibution by the u nion stewards of the 

"Caution flyer" w a s a protected activity; and

(2) the R e s p ondent's oral w a r n i n g to the stewa r d s based on their conduct in distributing 

such literature v iolated Sec. 19(a)(1) of the 

Order. (Navy, Naval Air R e w o r k Facility,

A / S L M R No. 543)

35 08 12 Solicitation

Rule limiting employee solicitation on behalf 

of union to n o n working time and in nonworking 

area w a s improper since, in the absence of 

unusual circumstances, such solicitation was 

permissible on agency property, including w o r k 

areas, during nonw o r k i n g time. (Federal 

Energy A d m . , Reg i o n IV, Atlanta, Ga.,

A / S L M R No. 541)

35 12 00 Section 19(a)(2)

Al leged v i o l ation of Sec. 19(a)(2) dismissed w here ALJ 

found that w o r k performance, n o t union animus, w as 

m o t i v a t i n g factor in union president's job reassignment. 

(Air Force, 4392d Aerospace Support Group, Vandenberg 

AFB, Cal., A / S L M R No. 537)

79

6-30-76
C o m p laint dismissed where any discrimination 

involved was w i t h regard to employee's 

status as p r o b a t i o n a r y employee, and was not 

based on, or m o t i v a t e d by, mem b e r s h i p activity 

or sympathy w i t h regard to labor organization. 

(Navy, N o r f o l k Naval Shipyard, A / S L M R No. 548)

R e s p o n d e n t did not violate Sec. 19(a)(2) by 

removing an employee w h o was promoted to a 

supervisory posi t i o n from dues w i t h h o l d i n g w i t h ­

out consultation w i t h the exclusive r e p r e s e n ­

tative. (U. S. Mar i n e Corps A i r S t a . , El Toro, 

A / S L M R No. 560)

A/S adopted ALJ's finding that Acti v i t y ' s denial 

of promotion to certain employees was based 

on their lack of expertise and n o t on their 

p artic i p a t i o n in union activities, and ordered 

complaint dismissed. (Bureau of Dist r i c t Office 

Operations, SSA, HEW, Boston, Mass.,

A /SL M R No. 563)

a / s found evidence insufficient to establish 

that Activity's failure to assign overtime to 

an employee was m o t i v a t e d by anti-union c o n s i d e r ­

ations or was based on the employee's filing of 

a complaint or giving testimony under the Order. 

(Navy, Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo,

C a l . , A / S L M R No. 570)

Res p o n d e n t did not violate Sections 19(a)(1) 

and (2) of the O rder by suspending the NFFE 

local president for a safety v i o l a t i o n whe r e

(1) safety was the only concern of the s u perv isor who proposed the suspension; (2) the 

R e s pondent had not penalized or reprimanded 

NFFE local officers for past labor relations 

activities; and (3) it did not appear that 

similar conduct of other employees had bee n or 

w ould be condoned or allowed by the Respondent. 

(Air Force, H q . , 31st Combat Support Group 

(TAC), Homestead AFB, Fla., A/SL M R No. 578)

35 12 00

35 12 00 Section 19(a)(2) (cont'd)

6-30-76 80
35 12 00

35 12 00 Section 19(a)(2) (cont'd)

A ctivity did not v i olate Sections 19(a)(1) 

and (2) of the Order by failing to promote the 

C omplainant w here (1) the subjective judgment 

of the official responsible for promotions 

determined who would be promoted; (2) animus 

or other d i scriminatory mot i v e concerning the 

Complainant's union activities was not shown;

(3) evidence was not adduced w h i c h could have 

afforded a comparison of the A c t ivity's e v a l u a ­

tion of the w o r k performance of the Complainant 

and of the employees who w ere promoted; and (4) 

the evidence failed to establish that the 

Compla i n a n t had been subjected to disparate 

treatment. (Fed. D e p osit Insurance Corp.,

N e w Y o r k Region, A / S L M R No. 580)

a / s adopted ALJ's conclusion that complaint 

should be dismissed based on finding that 

testimony of witne s s e s in support of complaint 

was either h e a r s a y or based on events well 

beyond reach of complaint, w h i c h alleged (1) 

that A ctivity repeatedly passed over for p r o ­

m o t i o n an employee who was a past president and 

active m e m b e r of the Complainant; and (2) that 

a' supervisor remarked to another employee during 

a p r o m otion evaluation period that the subject 

employee's union activities h urt him, not his 

work. (VA Domiciliary, White City, Ore.,

A / S L M R No. 581)

Section 19(a)(2) complaint dismissed where 

evidence did n o t establish that warnings to 

Complainant's representative regarding tardiness resulted from union activities, and where 

evidence did not support an allegation that 

Complainant's representative was accused of 

breaking and entering. (DOT, FAA, Eastern 

Region, A / S L M R No. 585)

Act i v i t y found not to have violated Sec. 19(a)(2) 

by placing on AWOL status, and then suspending, Complainant for refusing to move duty station. 

(Dept, of A g r i c . , Forest Service, Regional Off., 

Juneau, Alas., A / S L M R No. 595)

81 6-30-76
A/S found, in concurrence w i t h ALJ, that there 

w a s insufficient evidence to show that the 

failure to re-employ an employee constituted 

dis c r i m i n a t i o n that discouraged m e m bership in 

the union or that such failure discouraged 

me m b e r s h i p in the union by m e a n s of d i s c r i m i n a ­

tion. (Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, V a . , 

A / S L M R No. 618)

Sec. 19(a)(2) a l legation dismissed w h e r e C o m ­

plainant failed to m e e t bur d e n of proof that 

supervisor informed an employee that she w as 

denied p r o m otion because of her union activities. 

(SSA, M i d - A m e r i c a Program C n t r . , BRSI, Kansas 

City, M o . , A / S L M R No. 619)

A n offer of s supervisory pos i t i o n to a chief 

steward was adequately explained as essentially 

an administrative mistake, and n o t an attempt to 

"lure" her away from h e r union responsibilities. 

(DSA, DCASR, Lo s Angeles, C a l . , A / S L M R No. 633)

Based on a certain credited testimony, it w a s found 

that the termination of the p r o b ationary ^ 

employee involved was based on the employee s 

unsatisfactory w o r k performance and w a s u n ­

related to his partic i p a t i o n in union activities. 

(HUD, Des Moines Insuring Off., A / S L M R No. 641)

The A/S found that the Complainant failed to 

sustain the burden of proof in support of 

its allegations that its v i c e - p r e s i d e n t was^ 

discriminated against because of union c o n s i ­

derations. (Dept, of Defense, A i r N a t 1. Guard, 

147th Fighter Group, Austin, Tex., A / S L M R No. 667)

35 16 00 Section 19(a)(3)

No v i o l ation found of Sec. 19(a)(3) w h e n R e s ­

pondent complied w i t h a status quQ policy of 

m aintaining dues w i t h h o l d i n g services for 

ECOM, Philadelphia employees transferred to ECOM, 

Ft. Monmouth, pending disposition of a r e p r e s e n ­

tation matter. A/S also adopted ALJ finding 

that the situation of ECOM, Philadelphia employees 

who were transferred w ith their function to Ft. 

Monmouth, and m i g h t thereby constitute an e x i s t ­

ing unit, was different from employees who chose

35 16 00

35 12 00 Section 19(a)(2) (cont'd)

6-30-76 82
35 20 20

35 16 00 Section 19(a)(3) (coiit*d)

to transfer out of their unit in Ft. M o n ­

m o u t h as p art of a reorganization. C o n s e ­

quently, no disparate treatment existed i n s o ­

far as the latter (but n o t the former) had 

their dues w i t h h o l d i n g services stopped.

(DOT, U. S. ECOM, Ft. Monmouth,

A / S L M R No. 617)

A/S adopted ALJ's finding of v i o l a t i o n whe r e 

A ctivity gave improper assistance to outside 

union in obtaining showing of interest. (Navy, 

N avy C o m missary Store Complex, Oakland,

A / S L M R No. 654)

35 20 00 Section 19(a)(4)

A/S found evidence insufficient to establish 

that Act i v i t y ' s failure to assign overtime to 

an employee w a s m o t i v a t e d by anti-union con s i ­

derations or w a s based on the employee's filing 

of a complaint or giving testimony under the 

Order. (Navy, Mare Island Naval Shipyard, 

Vallejo, Cal., A / S L M R No. 570)

A lt h o u g h the A/S found that, as a general rule, 

employees should receive p rior approval before 

attempting to appear as witne s s e s pursuant to 

Sec. 206.7 of the Regs, he also found that, 

under the circumstances herein, (1) the decision 

by the Agency's representative not to take 

exception to the ALJ's ruling that the 

e mployee's appearance w a s necessary; (2) the 

R e s p o ndent's failure to abide by that ruling; 

and (3) the subsequent disciplining of the 

C omplainant w ere in v i o l a t i o n of Sec. 19(a)(4). 

(Bellingham Flight Service S t a . , FAA, Northwest 

Region, DOT, Bellingham, Wash., A / S L M R No. 597)

Age n c y and Acti v i t y did not violate Sections 

19(a)(1) and (4) by their 1972 professional 

appraisal of employee, since the employee's 

engagement in protected activities played no 

part in such appraisal. (National Labor 

Relations Board, Regi o n 17, and National Labor 

Relations Board, A / S L M R No. 664)

83 6-30-76
A g e n c y and A c t i v i t y did n o t violate Sections 

19(a)(1) and (4) by their 1973 professional 

appraisal of employee, since the employee's 

e ng a g e m e n t in protected activities played no p a r t 

in such appraisal. (National Labor R e l a t i o n s 

Board, R e g i o n 17, and National Labor R e l a t i o n s 

Board, A / S L M R No. 670)

A g e n c y and Acti v i t y vio l a t e d Sections 19(a)(1) 

and (4) by their 1974 professional appraisal 

of employee w h e r e such appraisal included 

c r i t icism of the employee because he gave 

notice of his intentions to file a U L P complaint 

before his supervisor deemed it to be appropriate. 

(National Labor Relations Board, R e g i o n 17, 

and National Labor Relations Board, A / S L M R No. 671)

35 24 00 Section 19(a)(5)

Where employees continued to remain in the e x ­

c lusively recognized unit. Respondent, as a 

co-employer of employees, w a s obligated to 

continue to accord r e cognition to the labor 

organization, w h i c h includes the obl i g a t i o n to 

continue to honor any existing negoti a t e d 

a greement between the labor orga n i z a t i o n and the 

previous activity. Where agreement pertained 

to transferred employees, improper with d r a w a l of 

recognition in derogation of its o b l igation "to 

accord recognition to a labor organi z a t i o n 

qualified for such recognition" vio l a t e d Sec. 

19(a)(5). (AAFES, South Texas A rea Exchange, 

Lackland AFB, Tex., A / S L M R No. 542)

A l l egation that A ctivity viol a t e d Sec. 19(a)(5) 

by wron g f u l l y conducting b a r gaining relationship 

w as n o t proper inasmuch as that p rovision 

relates to the granting of appropriate r e c o g n i ­

tion. (Navy, Norfolk Naval Shipyard,

A / S L M R No. 548)

A c t i v i t y’s refusal to enter into negoti a t i o n s 

w i t h incumbent exclusive representative for n e w 

agreement n o t violative of Sec. 19(a)(5) w h e r e 

valid Q C R raised w i t h respect to p o r tion of 

existing unit by filing of p etition by another 

union. (Air Force, H q . , 31st Combat Support 

Group, Homestead AFB, Homestead, Fla.,

A / S L M R No. 574)

35 24 00

35 20 00 Section 19(a)(4) (cont'd)

6-30-76 84
35 24 00

In remanding A / S L M R No. 360, the Council, in 

FLRC No. 74A-22, rejected the c o - e mployer 

doctrine as fashioned and applied by the A/S 

w i t h regard to the reorgani z a t i o n in question 

n o t i n g that, a lthough both the R e s p o n d e n t and 

the A r m y are components of the D e p a r t m e n t of 

Defense, the R e s p o n d e n t and the A r m y have 

separate missions, functions, regulations, a d ­

m i n i s t r a t i o n s and commands and that n e i t h e r the 

R e s p o n d e n t n o r the Army, before or after the 

reorganization, shared any common control over 

those employees transferred to the R e s p o n d e n t 

or the remaining employees in the Army's 

bargaining unit. Accordingly, the Council found 

that the R e s p o n d e n t and A t m y retained their 

separate employing identities over their r e s p e c ­

tive employees before and after the r e o r g a n i z a ­

tion and that each component thus remained a 

separate employing "agency" for the purpose of 

according exclusive recognition to the labor 

o r g a nization representing its employees under 

Sec. 10 of the Order. Further, noti n g p a r t i ­

cularly that the reorganization involved the 

transfer to the gaining employer of only a 

small segment of those employees in the e x i s t ­

ing exclus i v e l y recognized unit, the A/S 

found that the recognized unit had n o t been 

transferred substantially intact to the gaining 

empl o y e r to m e e t the Council's successor r e q u i r e ­

ments. Accordingly, as R e s p o n d e n t w a s neither 

a co-employer n o r a successor employer, A/S 

concluded that it w a s under no o b l igation to 

accord Compla i n a n t recognition w i t h respect to 

DPDO employees and dismissed the complaint.

(DSA, Defense P roperty Disposal Off., Aberdeen, 

Md., A / S L M R No. 615)

A/S, in agreement w i t h ALJ, found that R e s ­

pondents did n o t violate Sections 19(a)(1), (5) 

and (6) of the Order by terminating their c o l ­

lective b a r gaining agreement as the Respondents 

w ere n o t seeking to w i t h d r a w recognition of the 

u nion n o r were they attempting to avoid b a r g a i n ­

ing w i t h the union but rather, the Respondents, 

in terminating the collective bargaining a g r e e ­

ment, w h i c h they did in compliance w i t h the

35 24 00 Section 19(a)(5) (cont'd)

85 6-30-76
m

t ermination section of the agreement, were 

em p l oying a legitimate m a n e u v e r to ensure 

that the parties w o u l d have to b a r gain for an 

a g r e ement w h i c h w o u l d conform in all respects 

to the EG. (Dept, of Commerce, U. S. M e r c h a n t 

Mari n e Academy, Kings Point, N. Y . ,

A / S L M R No. 620)

Refusal to n e g o tiate a n e w collective b a r g a i n ­

ing a g r e ement as long as a representation 

pet i t i o n filed by another labor organ i z a t i o n 

is pending is n o t violative of Sec. 19(a)(5). 

(Dept.of Agric., Off. of I n v estigation and 

Off. of Audit, A / S L M R No. 643)

A g e n c y head's determ i n a t i o n to exclude i n v e s ­

tigatory and audit employees from coverage of 

EO p ursuant to Sec. 3(b)(4) on grounds that EO 

could n o t be applied to such employees in 

m a n n e r consistent w i t h internal security of 

A g e n c y was n o t arbitrary or capricious and 

accordingly, the withdrawal, in effect, of 

Complainant's exclusive r ecognition covering 

those employees w a s n o t violative of Sec. 

19(a)(5). (Dept, of Agric., Off. of Inv e s t i ­

gation and Off. of Audit, A / S L M R No. 643)

Statement of representative of Res p o n d e n t made 

at a m e e t i n g to president of union council 

that he was n o t talking to h i m n o t violative of 

Sec. 19(a)(5) where statement should have been 

interpreted as m e r e l y informing p r e s i d e n t of 

council that conversation was b e t w e e n R e s p o n ­

dent's representative and representative of a 

constituent local of the u nion council. (Navy, 

Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, Cal.,

A / S L M R No. 646)

Pursuant to FLRC request, FLRC No. 75A-93, 

the A/S further considered and clarified his 

decision in A/SL M R No. 542 in light of the 

principles set forth in Defense Supply Agency, 

Defense Property Disposal Office, A b e r d e e n 

Proving Ground, Aberdeen, M d . , FLRC No. 74A-22. 

A/S found, consistent w i t h FLRC's rationale, 

that Respondent did not violate Sec. 19(a)(5) 

of EO by w i thdrawing recognition from Complainant 

since Respondent was neither a co-employer n o r a

35 24 00

35 24 00 Section 19(a)(5) (cont'd)

6-30-76 86
35 za u«

35 24 00 Section 19(a)(5) (cont’d)

successor e mployer and was, therefore, u n d e r no 

o b ligation to accord the C o m p l a i n a n t recognition. 

(Army and A i r Force Exchange Service, South Texas 

A r e a Exchange, Lac k l a n d AFB, Tex., A / S L M R No. 669)

35 28 00 Section 19(a)(6)

35 28 04 Res p o n s e to Bar g a i n i n g R e q u e s t

Pur s u a n t to FLRC No. 74A-77, and rationale 

therein, A/S reversed h o l d i n g in A / S L M R No. 435, 

in w h i c h he h a d found Res p o n d e n t ' s conduct to be 

v i o l a t i v e of Sec. 19(a)(6), and ordered that the 

c omplaint be dismissed in its entirety. (Vandenberg AFB, 4392d Aeros p a c e Support Group, 

V a n d e r b e r g AFB, Cal., A / S L M R No. 554)

Act i v i t y ' s refusal to enter into n e g o t i a ­

tions w i t h inciombent exclusive representative 

for n e w agreement n o t violative of Sec. 19(a)

(6) where valid Q C R raised w i t h respect to 

po r t i o n of incumbent's e xclusively recognized 

u nit by filing of p etition by another union*

(Air Force, Hq., 31st Combat Support Group, 

Homestead AFB, Homestead, Fla., A / S L M R No. 574)

Refusal to negotiate a n e w collective b a r g a i n ­

ing agreement as long as a representation p e ­

tition filed by another labor organization for 

certain employees in the unit is pending n ot 

v i o l ative of Sec. 19(a)(6). (Dept, of A g r i c . , 

Off. of Investigation and Off. of Audit,

A / S L M R No. 643)

35 28 08 Failure to M eet and Confer G e nerally

A/S found that an R A petition, based on a good 

faith doubt as to the continued m a j o r i t y status 

of an incumbent exclusive representative, is 

subject to the timeliness requirements of 

Sec. 202.3(d) of the Regs and, therefore, he 

concluded, in effect, that the R A p etition was 

filed untimely, as it w a s filed w i t h i n the 

insulated 90 day period provided by Sec. 202.3(d) 

of the Regs. A/S n oted that both he and the

6-30-76
FLRC have indicated that w h e n an R A p e t i t i o n 

is filed in good faith, the p e t i t i o n i n g agency 

should be permitted to remain n e utral during the 

p endency of such petition and be given a r e a s o n ­

able opport u n i t y to comply w i t h the consequences 

w h i c h flo w from any representation d ecision by 

the A/S before incurring the risk of an unfair 

labor practice finding, thus c o n cluding that the 

complaint should be dismissed. (Denver Airway 

F a c ilities Hub Sector, FAA, R o c k y M o u n t a i n Region, 

DOT, Aurora, Colo., A / S L M R No. 535)

Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-77, and rationale therein, A / S reversed h o l d i n g in A / S L M R No. 435, 

in w h i c h he had found R e s p ondent's conduct to be 

violative of Sec. 19(a)(6), and ordered that the 

complaint be dismissed in its entirety. (Vandenberg AFB, 4392d Aerospace Support Group, Vandenberg AFB, Cal., A / S L M R No. 554)

Resp o n d e n t did n o t violate Sec. 19(a)(6) by 

removing an employee w h o was promoted to a 

supervisory pos i t i o n from dues with h o l d i n g 

w i t h o u t consultation w i t h the exclusive rep r e ­

sentative. (U. S. Mar i n e Corps A i r S t a . , El 

Toro, A / S L M R No. 560)

Acti v i t y v iolated Sec. 19(a)(6) where steward 

w as notified as an affected employee of u n i l a ­

teral change in Acti v i t y ' s p ast practice of 

permitting unrestricted employee parking. (GSA, 

Region 3, PBS, Central Support Field Off.,

A/S L M R No. 583)

Activity not obligated to m e e t and confer with 

Complainant, who was acting as an individual 

rather than on behalf of the exclusive rep r e ­

sentative. The o b ligation to m e e t and confer 

set forth in Sec. 11(a) of the Order is owed 

by an agency or activity to the labor o r g a n i ­

zation w hich is the exclusive representative 

of employees in the unit, and n o t to any i n ­

dividual. (Dept, of A g r i c . , Forest Service, 

Regional Off., Juneau, Alas., A / S L M R No. 595)

35 28 08

35 28 08 Failure to Meet and Confer Generally (cont*d)

6-30-76 88
A l t h o u g h the A c t i v i t y m a y have acted in 

apparent good faith by n e g o t i a t i n g w i t h the 

exclusive r e presentative in an effort to i n ­

corporate such changes as had been requested 

by the Age n c y in two separate reviews, pursuant 

to its Sec. 15 authority, of the agreement 

entered into by the parties at the local level, 

the Acti v i t y nev e r t h e l e s s v iolated Sec. 19(a)(1) 

and (6) of the EO by failing to implement the 

revised a g r e ement w h i c h had been brought into 

conformity w i t h the changes sought by the 

Agency, at w h i c h time the agreement became 

valid and binding. (The Adju t a n t General, State 

of Illinois, 111. Air Nat'l. Guard, A / S L M R No. 598)

Acti v i t y did n o t violate its duty to bargain 

in good faith by cancelling a "negotiation" 

session in order to hold a "consultation" meeting, 

inasmuch as the A ctivity fulfilled its o b l i g a ­

tion, under the circumstances, to engage in 

good faith b a rgaining regardless of the d e s i g n a ­

tion of the meeting. (4392d Aerospace Support 

Group, Vand e n b e r g AFB, Cal., A / S L M R No. 623)

Res p o n d e n t v iolated Sections 19(a)(1) and (6) 

by failing to not i f y Complainant prior to 

R e s p o ndent's final determination or decision 

to change the w o r k hours of certain unit 

employees. Further, R e spondent was obligated, 

upon request, to m e e t and confer in good faith 

w i t h Complainant concerning the proposed change 

in w o r k hours. Regardless of w h e t h e r or not, 

under the circumstances, the scheduling of w o r k 

hours w a s w i t h i n the ambit of Sec. 11(b), 

the parties made the scheduling of w o r k hours a 

ne g otiable m a t t e r by the terms of their n e g o ­

tiated agreement. (Southeast Exchange Region 

of the AAFES, R osewood Warehouse, Columbia,

S. C . , A / S L M R No. 656)

A/S adopted A L J finding that the A/S did n ot 

have jurisdiction to consider alleged Sec. 19 

(a)(1) and (6) viola t i o n because Respondent's 

me r e announced intention to impose a change in 

duty hours could n o t be equated w i t h an actual 

implementation thereof w i t h i n the m e a n i n g of 

Sec. 11(d) of the EO. Proper resolution of 

such a n e g otiability issue is through the Sec. 

11(c)(2) and (4) procedures of the EO. C o m ­

plaint dismissed. (Dept, of A g r i c . , Grain Div. 

Field Off., N e w Orleans, La., A / S L M R No. 666)

35 2o uo

35 28 08 Failure to Meet and Confer Generally (cont*d)

89 6-30-76
35 28 12 Failure to Mee t and Confer on Impact 

or Procedures

A c t i v i t y did n o t violate O r d e r w i t h respect 

to failure to b a rgain over i m p l e m e n t a t i o n and 

impact of n e w travel regulations w h e r e evidence 

failed to establish that travel regulations 

w e r e applied in such a w a y as to change any of 

the travel provisions of collective bargaining 

agreements between Res p o n d e n t and Complainant. 

(Dept, of Treasury, IRS, A / S L M R No. 550)

Agen c i e s and activities obligated to afford 

exclusive representative a reasonable o p p o r ­

tunity to m e e t and confer concerning impact 

and i m plementation of decisions m a d e w i t h respect 

to subject w i t h i n the ambit of Sec. 11(b) of 

the Order. Alt h o u g h agencies and activities 

are n o t obligated to negotiate on such matters, 

FLRC has held that the parties m a y negotiate 

on such subjects and reach b i n ding agreements 

thereon. (U. S. A i r Force Electronics Systems 

Div i s i o n (AFSC), H a n s c o m AFB, A / S L M R No. 571)

All e g a t i o n that Res p o n d e n t failed to confer or 

consult w i t h C o mplainant w i t h respect to impact 

on employees of relocation of a particular 

facility is dismissed because decision to move 

or relocate had not been finalized; no o b l i ­

gation was imposed, therefore, upon Respondent 

under Sec. 11(b) of the Order. Complainant had 

ample opportunity prior to contemplated relocation to request bargaining on impact but 

failed to do so. (U. S. A i r Force Electronics 

Systems D ivision (AFSC), H a n s c o m AFB,

A / S L M R No. 571)

Allegation that R e s p o n d e n t viol a t e d Sections 

19(a)(1) and (6) of the Order w h e n it failed 

to consult or negotiate w i t h respect to impact 

of transfer of fifteen employees from Portland 

to Vancover is dismissed where (1) obligation 

was discharged w h e n another local w a s involved 

in mana g e m e n t decision m a k i n g process; and (2) 

no evidence was found that Compla i n a n t had 

requested such bargaining. (DOT, Federal H i g h ­

wa y A d m . , Vancouver, Wash., A / S L M R No. 612)

35 28 12

6-30-76 90
35 38 16

91

35 28 12 Failure to M e e t and Con f e r on Impact 

or P r ocedures (cont*d)

C o n t r a r y to the ALJ, the A/S found that 

R e s p o n d e n t did n o t violate Sections 19(a)(1) 

and (6) inas m u c h as, under the circumstances, 

C o m p l a i n a n t did n o t lack sufficient notice of 

a change of w o r k hours of certain unit employees 

so as to afford it a reasonable opport u n i t y to 

seek to m e e t and confer on impact and i m p l e m e n ­

tation. (Southeast Exchange R e g i o n of the AAFES, 

R osewood Warehouse, Columbia, S. C . ,

A / S L M R No. 656)

A c t i v i t y did not violate o b l igation to consult, 

confer or negotiate wit h respect to impact of 

its decision to establish a n e w tour of duty 

for certain employees in the b a r gaining unit 

inasmuch as exclusive representative had ample 

notice and o p portunity to request bargaining 

on impact and implementation, but failed to do 

so. (Alabama Nat'l. Guard, A / S L M R No. 660)

A c t i v i t y did not violate o b l igation to negotiate 

w i t h the Complainant over the promulgation of 

"Attachment 10" of the R e s p o ndent's Affirmative 

A ct i o n Plan since the disputed upward m o b i l i t y 

positions in "Attachment 10" were not the product 

of the Agency Upward Mobi l i t y Program but were 

identified and filled prior to the promulgation 

of this Program. "Attachment 10" did n ot 

encompass m a t ters involving the impact of and 

the procedures to be used in implementing the 

Res p o n d e n t ' s Upward Mob i l i t y Program. (Environm e n t a l Protection Agency, Reg i o n VII, Kansas 

City, Mo., A / S L M R No. 668)

35 28 16 Refusal to A l l o w Formal D i s cussion Repres e n t a t i o n

A l l eged refusal to allow union representative 

to represent an employee facing possible suspension, in discussions w i t h Act i v i t y c o n c e r n ­

ing suspension, not violative of Sec. 19(a)(6) 

w h e r e (1) m e e t i n g was n o t a "formal discussion";.

(2) union representative did, in fact, ultimately 

participate in substantial m a n n e r in discussion 

at meeting; and (3) the p osition of Respondent's 

r epresentative concerning role of u nion r e p r e ­

sentative reflected essentially his good faith 

i n terpretation of n e gotiated agreement, as d i s ­

tinguished from clear unilateral breach of 

agreement. (FAA, M u s k e g o n A i r T r affic Control 

Tower, A / S L M R No. 534)

6-30-76
FLRC issued its Decision on Appeal, FLRC No.

74A-95, in which it held that the A/S finding

of a violation of Sec. 19(a)(1), in A/SLMR No.

457 , was inconsistent with the purposes of the

Order. FLRC set aside A/S decision in

A/SLMR No. 457 and remanded the case to him for

appropriate action. A/S issued a Supplemental

Decision and Order dismissing the case in its

entirety. (NASA, Washington, D. C., and Lyndon

B. Johnson Space Center (NASA), Houston, Tex.,

A/SLMR No. 566)

A chief steward's right to represent employees

not impeded where (1 ) in each case of alleged

harassment the record revealed that valid

grounds existed for the Respondent's actions;

and (2) the Respondent's treatment of the chief

steward's leave request was justified by her

past use of emergency leave. (DSA, DCASR, Los

Angeles, Cal., A/SLMR No. 633)

Failure to allow the exclusive representative

to be present during interviews conducted with

unit employees is not violative where Civil

Service Commission conducted interviews pursuant to law and EO and was not, therefore,

"Agency Management" within the meaning of

Sec. 2(f) of the EO with respect to the unit

employees. (CSC, Washington, D. C.,

A/SLMR No. 640)

Denying the exclusive representative the right

to be present during interviews conducted

among unit employees was not violative where

(1) Respondent-Civil Service Commission was

not "Agency Management" within the meaning of

Sec. 2(f) of the Order while performing its

evaluative function pursuant to law and EO

and, therefore, had no bargaining obligation to

the exclusive representative; and (2) where

Respondent-IRS's employee serving on the CSC

team was under CSC supervision while conducting

the evaluation. (CSC, and IRS, Washington, D.C.,

A/SLMR No. 642)

35 28 16

35 28 16 Refusal to Allow Formal Discussion Representation

(cont*d)

6-30-76 92
35 28 20

35 28 16 Refusal to Allow Formal Discussion Representation

(cont*d)

Complaint alleging that the Respondent failed

to give notice to the Complainant regarding

a meeting with an employee on a grievance

which she had filed and to afford the Complainant an opportunity to be present at such

meeting is dismissed and no violation of Sec.

19(a)(6) is found to have occurred inasmuch as

the Complainant's president was afforded an

opportunity to be present prior to the discussion

with the grievant and that this offer was declined. (IRS, Dept, of the Treasury, Hartford

District Off., A/SLMR No. 649)

The A/S adopted ALJ's finding that the failure

of the Respondent to allow the Complainant to

be represented at investigatory interviews of

unit employees by the Respondent's representatives was not violative of Sec. 19(a)(6) of the

Order as such meetings t?ere not "formal discussions" within the meaning of Sec. 10(e) of the

Order. (Air Force, Lackland AFB, Headquarters

Military Training Center (ATC), Tex.,

A/SLMR No. 652)

35 28 20 Uncompromising Attitude

A/S reaffirmed the policy stated in Report

Number 55 that while awaiting the resolution of

a petition in which an activity has raised a

good faith doubt as to the appropriateness of an

existing unit following a reorganization, there

is no obligation on the part of the activity to

negotiate with the exclusive representative.

Although such a procedure existed at the time

of the instant case, the Respondent failed to

file a timely RA petition. (DSA, Defense

Property Disposal Off., Aberdeen, Md.,

A/SLMR No. 6l5)

Activity did not violate its duty to bargain

in good faith by insisting that negotiations

proceed along an agreed upon approach. (4392d

Aerospace Support Group, Vandenberg AFB, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 623)

93 6-30-76
A/S, in agreement with ALJ, found that the

Respondents did not engage in dilatory tactics

and did not refuse to negotiate and confer in

good faith with the union in violation of

Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 ) of the Order as the

record disclosed that the Respondents were

willing to meet and did, in fact, meet at

reasonable times with representatives of the

union, and although the Respondents were engaged in hard bargaining with the union, they

did make a good faith effort to resolve their

differences. (Dept, of Commerce, U. S. Merchant

Marine Academy, Kings Point, N. Y., A/SLMR No. 620)

Activity did not violate its duty to bargain

in good faith by allegedly offering proposals

during negotiations it "knew” would be unacceptable to the Complainant labor organization, inasmuch as evidence revealed that

« Activity did not adhere to any of these proposals

to the point of impasse. (4392d Aerospace Support

Group, Vandenberg AFB, Cal., A/SLMR No. 623)

35 28 28 Unilateral Changes in Terms and Conditions

of Employment

A/S adopted ALJ's finding that if parties reach

an impasse following good faith negotiations an

employer may unilaterally impose changes in

working conditions which do not exceed the

offers or proposals made in the prior negotiations. A/S found that parties had not reached

an impasse on a negotiable issue, and that a

unilateral change in terms and conditions of

employment by the Activity was violative of

Sec. 19(a)(6). (San Antonio Air Logistics

Cntr., San Antonio Air Materiel Area (AFLC),

A/SLMR No. 540)

Respondent's failure (1) to provide the labor

organization with appropriate notice of its

intentions to withdraw recognition of the labor

organization; and (2) to afford labor organization an opportunity to meet and confer with

regard thereto did not violate Sec. 19(a)(6)

35 28 28

35 28 24 Dilatory and Evasive Tactics

6-30-76 9^
35 28 28

because matters related to an improper refusal

to accord appropriate recognition are inseparable

from the theory of violation of Sections 19(a)(1)

and (5) as previously stated in DSA, Defense

Prooertv Disposal Office- Aberdeen^ Md.,

A/SLMR No. 360, (AAFES, South Texas Area

Exchange, Lackland AFB, Tex., A/SLMR No. 542)

Activity violated Sec. 19(a)(6) by implementing

unilateral changes in promotion and appointment

practices without first affording exclusive

representative opportunity tomeet and confer

on such changes. (Dept, of Agric., and Off. of

Investigation, A/SLMR No. 555)

Temporary suspension of the Plan of the Day

(POD) was not found to be a unilateral change

where (1) the Activity did accommodate the union

with respect to its concern over the listing of

vacancy announcements in the POD by extending

the listing of those which would have appeared

while the POD was suspended; and (2) publication

was resumed in a little over a week without substantial change. (Navy, Naval Weapons Sta.,

Concord, Cal., A/SLMR No. 577)

A/S found that Activity, by direction of Agency,

violated Sections 19(a)H ) and (6) by terminating differential pay, paid pursuant to arbitration awards. (Naval Air Rework Facility, Pensacola, Fla., A/SLMR No. 608)

Upon remand by Council in A/SLMR No. 360 and

based on its rationale, A/S found Respondent was

under no obligation to accord Complainant recognition with respect to DPDO employees.

(DSA, Defense Property Disposal Off., Aberdeen,

Md., A/SLMR No. 615)

A/S found that alleged violations of a negotiated agreement which concern differing and

arguable interpretations of such agreement, as

distinguished from alleged actions \^ich would

constitute clear, unilateral breaches of the

agreement, are not deemed to be violative of

the Order and that, under the circumstances.

35 28 28 Unilateral Changes in Terms and Conditions

of Employment (cont'd)

95 6-30-76
the aggrieved party's remedy for such matters

lies within the grievance machinery of the negotiated agreement, rather than through the

unfair labor practice procedures. (Army, Watervliet Arsenal, Watervliet, N. Y., A/SLMR No. 624)

Activity violated Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 ) when

it changed unilaterally (1 ) the penalties required for an employee who is absent without

official leave (AWOL); (2) the practice of permitting tardy employees to take annual leave or

to make up the time by working during break

periods; (3) when an employee is considered at

his/her work; (4) when employees may engage in

personal conversations in the work area during

non-break periods; (5) when employees may put

on coats and overshoes at the end of the tour

of duty; and (6 ) the amount of clean up time

permitted. (U. S. Army Finance and Accounting

Cntr., Ft. Benjamin Harrison, Indianapolis,

Ind., A/SLMR No. 651)

Activity violated Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 ) of

the Order by unilaterally issuing memorandum announcing a vehicle registration program which

supplemented the requirements of a prior Army

Regulation dealing with vehicle registration,

which A/s held was an appropriate subject for

bargaining under Sec. 11(a) of the Order.

(Army Electronics Command, Ft. Monmouth, N.J.,

A/SLMR No. 653)

A/S adopted ALJ's finding that the Activity did

not violate Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 ) of EO by

its decision to establish and implement a

second shift among its maintenance employees.

The A/S noted that he was advised administratively that, subsequent to the filing of the

complaint, a representation petition was filed

and the Complainant affirmatively disclaimed

interest in representing the employees in its

unit. A/S, under the circumstances, found

issues raised by complaint to be rendered

moot. (Tank Automotive Command, Warren, Mich.,

A/SLMR No. 659)

35 28 28

35 28 28 Unilateral Changes in Terms and Conditions

of Employment (cont*d)

6-30-76 96
35 28 28

Respondent’s failure to bargain with Complainant

before promulgating "Attachment 10" of the

Respondent's Regional Affirmative Action Plan

not violative of Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 )

since Complainant was, in effect, seeking to

modify an upward mobility program promulgated

by the Respondent and A/S concluded that the

policing and enforcing of the Respondent's

Upward Mobility Program were not matters for

review under Sec. 19(a) of the Order. (Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Kansas

City, Mo., A/SLMR No. 668)

Generally, agency management violates its obligation to meet and confer under the Order when

it unilaterally changes those terms or conditions

of employment which are included within the ambit

of Sec. 11(a) of the Order. However, when they

have bargained to an impasse, that is, after

good faith negotiations have exhausted the prospects of concluding an agreement, agency management may unilaterally impose changes in the terms

and conditions of employment which do not exceed

the scope of its proposals made in the prior

negotiations, so long as appropriate notice is

given to the exclusive representative as to when

the changes are intended to be put into effect

in order to afford the exclusive representative

ample opportunity to invoke the services of the

FSIP at a time prior to the implementation of

the changes. However, should one of the parties

involved in an impasse exercise the option

available under Sec. 17 of the Order and request

the services of the FSIP, the parties must,

in the absence of an overriding exigency, maintain the status quo and permit the processes of

the FSIP to run their course before a unilateral

change may be effectuated. (U. S. Army Corps

of Engineers, Philadelphia District, A/SLMR No. 673)

35 28 28 Unilateral Changes in Terms and Conditions

of Employment (cont*d)

97 6-30-76
m.

FLRC issued its Decision on Appeal, FLRC No.

74A-95, in which it held that the A/S finding of a violation of Sec. 19(a)(1), in

A/SLMR No . 457, was inconsistent with the

purposes of the Order. FLRC set aside A/S

decision in A/SLMR No. 457 and remanded the

case to him for appropriate action. A/S

issued a Supplemental Decision and Order dismissing the case in its entirety. (NASA,

Washington, D.C., and Lyndon B. Johnson Space

Center (NASA), Houston, Tex., A/SLMR No. 566)

In remanding A/SLMR No. 432, the FLRC concluded that EO does not proscribe all communications with unit employees over matters relating to the collective bargaining relationship. Rather, only those communications which,

for example, amount to an attempt by agency

management to bypass the exclusive representative

and negotiate directly with unit employees, or

which urge employees to put pressure on the

representative to take a certain course of

action, or which threaten or promise benefits

to employees are violative of EO. Content,

intent and effect of posted January 16, 1973

letter could reasonably be equated with an

attempt to bargain directly with unit employees

and to urge them to put pressure on the union

to take certain actions in violation of

Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 ) of the Order. (Navy,

Naval Air Sta., Fallon, Nev., A/SLMR No. 587)

Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-54, A/S revised certain

portions of the remedial order in A/SLMR No. 400

which were inconsistent with FLRC finding that

(1) Sec. 10(e) does not impose upon a labor organization holding exclusive recognition an

obligation to represent a bargaining unit employee in an adverse action proceeding until

such time as the employee indicates a desire to

choose his own representative; and (2 ) an

agency's failure to recognize a labor organization's status as an employee's representative

in an adverse action proceeding, until the

employee designates another representative, does

not constitute an unfair labor practice. (Naval

Ordnance Sta., Louisville, Ky., A/SLMR No. 588)

35 28 32

35 28 32 Bypassing Exclusive Representative

6-30-76 98
Statement of representative of Respondent

made at a meeting to president of union

council that he was not talking to him not

violative of Sec.19(a)(6) where statement

should have been interpreted as merely informing president of council that conversation was between Respondent's representative

and representative of a constituent local of

the union council. (Navy, Mare Island Naval

Shipyard, Vallejo, Cal., A/SLMR No. 646)

Pursuant to FLRC request that A/S reconsider

and clarify his decision in A/SLMR No. 523,

in light of FLRC's subsequent decision in

Fallon (FLRC No. 74A-80), A/S reversed his

previous finding of Sections 19(a)(1) and (6 )

violations based on a supervisor's circulation

among certain employees of a memorandum pertaining to the status of the agreement between

the exclusive representative and the Respondent.

Thus, under the FLRC's clarification in Fallon,

not all direct communications pertaining to

the collective bargaining relationship of the

parties are deemed violative of the Order, and

each communication must be judged independently

and a determination made as to whether that

communication is violative. Under this clarified

standard, the A/S reversed his previous finding

of a violation, noting particularly that the

memorandum was an accurate reflection of the

parties' positions regarding the negotiated

agreement's status. (VA, VA Data Processing

Cntr., Austin, Tex., A/SLMR No. 663)

35 28 36 Refusal to Furnish Information

Pursuant to FLRC No. 73A-59, A/S found that

Activity's refusal to grant union representative, in connection with processing of an

employee grievance, access to documents which

reflected the evaluation panel's assessment of

"Best Qualified" candidates violated Sections

19(a)(1) and (6 ) of EO. (Dept, of Defense,

State of New Jersey, A/SLMR No. 539)

35 Z8 36

35 28 32 Bypassing Exclusive Representative (cont'd)

99 6-30-76
No violation of Sec. 19(a)(6) found where A/S

was advised administratively that Complainant

had been decertified as the exclusive representative, thus rendering moot the issues of

the complaint. However, A/S did not adopt

the rationale of the ALJ that the Complainant's

request for evaluation records was substantially

broader than that which the FLRC held an

activity would be required to produce, and that,

therefore, the burden shifted to the Complainant,

after an in toto denial of the records, to request them in "sanitized" form. (Dept, of

Agric., Forest Service, Pacific Southwest and

Range Experiment Sta. Berkeley, Cal.,

A/SLMR No. 573)

Activity's refusal to furnish chart of performance appraisals in connection with the processing of a grievance did not constitute

violation of Sec. 19(a)(6) where request was

made a month after the presentation of the

grievance at an advisory arbitration hearing.

However, A/S rejected ALJ's dicta that if

Complainant had requested the subject chart

in a timely manner, the Complainant's failure

to request the chart in "sanitized" form would

warrant Respondent's denial of request. (SSA,

Mid-America Program Cntr., BRSI, Kansas City,

Mo., A/SLMR No. 619)

Refusal to provide the Complainant with a copy

of the evaluation report concerning personnel

policies and practices among the employees

represented by the Complainant is not violative

where CSC conducted evaluation pursuant to law

and EO and was not, therefore, "Agency Management" within the meaning of Sec. 2(f) of the

Order. (CSC, Washington, D.C., A/SLMR No. 640)

35 28 36

35 28 36 Refusal to Furnish Information (cont*d)

35 32 00 Section 19(d)

Untimely filed grievance did not in any real sense invoke

grievance procedure and, therefore. Sec. 19(d) did not

preclude consideration of matter under unfair labor

practice procedures of EO. (FAA, Muskegon Air Traffic

Control Tower, A/SLMR No. 534)

6-30-76 100
" 31 @ 5])

Sec. 19(d) precluded consideration by A/S of aspect of

unfair labor practice complaint where (1 ) previously

filed grievance raised same issue; (2) response to

grievance made no mention of this aspect of grievance;

and (3) Complainant did not choose to pursue its

grievance appeal rights in this regard or seek specific

response from Respondent. (FAA, Muskegon Air Traffic

Control Tower, A/SLMR No. 534)

A/S affirmed ALJ finding that issue raised in ULP complaint had been raised previously in a negotiated

grievance procedure, which precluded Complainant from

raising issue before the A/S. (Navy, Mare Island Naval

Shipyard, Vallejo, Cal., A/SLMR No. 570)

A/S found, contrary to ALJ, that the Respondent did in

fact raise as a defense that a Sec. 19(a)(2) allegation

was the subject of an appeals procedure which had been

invoked. Therefore, the A/S, while agreeing that the

case could be dismissed on the merits, found that dismissal based on Sec. 19(d) was also warranted. (Dept,

of Agric., Forest Service, Regional Off., Juneau, Alas.,

A/SLMR No. 595)

Sec. 19(d) did not preclude entertainment of complaint

where refusal to provide chart of performance appraisals

was not subject of grievance procedure. (SSA, MidAmerica Program Cntr., BRSI, Kansas City, Mo.,

A/SLMR No. 619)

A/S adopted ALJ's finding that grievance procedure was

not invoked and, therefore, Sec. 19(d) did not preclude

further processing of the ULP. (CSC, and IRS, Washington,

D. C., A/SLMR No. 642)

35 32 00 Section 19(d) (cont'd)

101 6-30-76

40 04 00 General

No Entries

40 08 00 Section 19(b)(1)

No Entries

40 12 00 Section 19(b)(2)

No Entries

40 16 00 Section 19(b)(3)

No Entries

40 20 00 Section 19(b)(4)

Respondent engaged in conduct violative of Sec. 19(b)(4)

of EO in that it engaged in "informational" picketing of

Complainant's installation while the language of Sec.

19(b)(4) of EO prohibits all picketing in a labor-management dispute. (IRS, A/SLMR No. 536)

40 32 00

40 00 00 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES: LABOR ORGANIZATION

40 24 00 Section 19(b)(5)

No Entries

40 28 00 Section 19(b)(6)

No Entries

40 32 00 Section 19(c)

Although the dues provisions of the Respondent's constitution were ambiguous, the uncontroverted testimony

was that the Respondent's dues requirements were uniformly enforced. Nothing precludes a labor organization

from requiring membership in the state and national labor

organizations with which it is affiliated as a condition

of membership. (Quantico Education Assoc., A/SLMR No. 601)

6-30-76 ]^03

45 04 00 Notification and Dissemination of Remedies

In the event that the Rosewood Warehouse, where the unit

employees are located, is closed, then the remedial notice

to employees should be mailed by the Commanding Officer to

the former unit employees who were employed as of the time

the unfair labor practices found by the A/S occurred.

(Southeast Exchange Region of the AAFES, Rosewood Warehouse, Columbia, S.C., A/SLMR No. 656)

45 08 00 Advice of Compliance

No Entries

45 10 00 Modification to Orders

Pursuant to a FLRC request that the A/S reconsider and

clarify his decision in A/SLMR No. 523, in light of subsequent FLRC decisions, the A/S modified order, pursuant

to conclusions reached in reconsideration of case, and

also dismissed one of the complaints in consolidated

proceeding. (VA, VA Data Processing Cntr., Austin, Tex.,

A/SLMR No. 663)

45 12 00 Remedies for Improper Rules, Regulations and Orders

No Entries

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct

45 16 04 Interference, Solicitation or Distribution

of Literature

Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-54, A/S revised certain

portions of the remedial order in A/SLMR No. 400.

(Naval Ordnance Sta., Louisville, Ky., A/SLMR

No. 588)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from

ejecting from meetings or otherwise refusing

to meet with agents of the Complainant. (U.S.

Small Business Adm., Central Off., Washington,

D.C., A/SLMR No. 631)

Respondent ordered to cease and desist from

interfering with, restraining, or coercing unit

employees at the Activity by interfering with

the Activity's obligation to accord appropriate

45 16 04

45 00 00 REMEDIAL ORDERS AGAINST AGENCIES; UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES

6-30-76

105
45 16 04 Interference, Solicitation or Distribution

of Literature (Cont'd)

recognition to its employees' exclusive representative and to honor its existing negotiated

agreement with the labor organization, (Army

and Air Force Exchange Service, South Texas

Area Exchange, Lackland AFB, Tex., A/SLMR No. 669)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from unilaterally cancelling meeting rooms which previously have been approved for use by the exclusive representative. (Dept, of Transportation,

Off. of the Secretary, A/SLMR No. 672)

45 16 08 Discrimination

No Entries

45 16 12 Assisting a Labor Organization

Election results set aside, petition dismissed,

and Respondent ordered to cease and desist from

improper assistance to union which is not the

exclusive representative in consolidated ULP/RO

hearing. A/S noted, with respect to setting

election aside, that had investigation been conducted with respect to challenge to validity

of Petitioner's showing of interest, based on

ULP finding, election would never have been held.

A/S also noted application of Sec. 202.3(d) with

respect to the filing of any new petition.

(Navy, Navy Commissary Store Complex, Oakland,

A/SLMR No. 654)

45 16 16 Refusal to Accord Appropriate Recognition

Activity ordered to cease and desist from refusing to accord exclusive recognition to Complainant labor organization by withdrawal of

exclusive recognition and refusal to honor and

enforce the negotiated agreement with Complainant. Activity further ordered, upon request,

to accord exclusive recognition to Complainant

labor organization in the unit in which it had

previously enjoyed recognition and honor all

terms of the existing negotiated agreement,

(AAFES, South Texas Area Exchange, Lackland

AFB, Tex., A/SLMR No. 542)

45 16 16

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct (Cont'd)

106 6-30-76
45 16 16 Refusal to Accord Appropriate Recognition

(Cont* d)

In remanding A/SLMR No, 360, the Council, in

FLRC No, 74A-22, rejected the co-employer doctrine as fashioned and applied by the A/S with

regard to the reorganization in question noting that although both the Respondent and the

Army are components of the Department of Defense, the Respondent and the Army have separate missions, functions, regulations, administrations and commands and that neither the

Respondent nor the Army, before or after the

reorganization, shared any common control over

those employees transferred to the Respondent

or the remaining employees in the Army's bargaining unit. Accordingly, the Council found

that the Respondent and Army ratained their

separate employing identities over their respective employees before and after the reorganization and that each component thus

remained a separate employing "agency" for

the purpose of according exclusive recognition to the labor organization representing

its employees under Sec. 10 of the Order.

Further, noting particularly that the reorganization involved the transfer to the gaining

employer of only a small segment of those employees in the existing exclusively recognized

unit, the A/S found that the recognized unit

had not been transferred substantially intact

to the gaining employer to meet the Council's

successor requirements. Accordingly, as Respondent was neither a co-employer nor a successor employer, A/S concluded that it was

under no obligation to accord Complainant

recognition with respect to DPDO employees

and dismissed the complaint. (DSA, Defense

Property Disposal Off., Aberdeen, Md.,

A/SLMR No. 615)

45 16 20 Failure to Consult, Confer or Negotiate

Pending an A/S Decision with respect to Acting

Agency Head's Determination under Sec. 3(b)(4)

that the EO cannot be applied to the Agency's

investigative employees and, therefore, whether

the Complainant is the current exclusive representative of the investigative employees, the

45 16 20

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct (Cont'd)

107
45 16 20 Failure to Consult, Confer or Negotiate (Cont'd)

Agency will reestablish all promotion and

appointment practices in effect prior to a

certain date and will, upon request, meet and

confer with the Complainant with respect to

any proposed changes in promotion or appointment practices. Agency ordered to cease and

desist from implementing unilaterally any changes

in promotion or appointment practices without

first affording any exclusive representative of

the investigative employees the opportunity

to meet and confer on such. (Dept, of Agric.

and Off. of Investigation, A/SLMR No, 555)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from unilaterally changing policy of permitting unrestricted employee parking and to meet and confer with exclusive representative with respect

to changes in policy of permitting unrestricted

employee parking. (GSA, Region 3, PBS. Central

Support Field Off., A/SLMR No. 583)

Pursuant to FLRC No. 74A-54, A/S revised certain

portions of the remedial order in A/SLMR No, 400.

(Naval Ordnance Sta., Louisville, Ky., A/SLMR

No. 588)

The A/S ordered that the Agency approve, and

the Activity implement thereafter, the negotiated agreement which incorporated the specific changes previously sought by the Agency

pursuant to its Sec. 15 review authority,

(The Adjutant General, State of Illinois, 111.

Air Nat'l. Guard, A/SLMR No. 598)

Activity ordered to (1) cease and desist from

changing unilaterally the terms and conditions

of employment of unit employees; (2) rescind

and revoke the unilaterally instituted existing terms and conditions of employment; (3) make

whole any employee adversely affected by the

unilaterally instituted existing terms and conditions of employment; and (4) upon request,

meet and confer with the exclusive representative with respect to any proposed changes in

the terms and conditions of employment of unit

employees. (U.S. Army Finance and Accounting

Cntr., Ft. Benjamin Harrison, Indianapolis, Ind.,

A/SLMR No. 651)

45 16 20

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct (Cont'd)

108 6-30-76
45 16 20 Failure to Consult, Confer or Negotiate (Cont'd)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from instituting a motor vehicle registration program

without consulting, conferring or negotiating

with the exclusive representative of unit employees.

Activity further ordered to meet and confer

with exclusive representative with respect to

the registration of civilian employees' motor

vehicles. (Army Electronics Command, Ft.

Monmouth, N.J., A/SLMR No. 653)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from failing

to notify the exclusive representative concerning

changes in the work hours of certain unit

employees and from failing to afford such

representative the opportunity to meet and confer

on the decision to effectuate such changes.

(Southeast Eschange Region of the AAFES,

Rosewood Warehouse, Columbia, S.C., A/SLMR

No. 656)

Activity ordered to cease and desist from changing any term or condition of employment which

is the subject of collective bargaining negotiations when an impasse in such negotiations has

been reached without notifying the exclusive

representative so as to afford it ample opportunity to invoke the services of the FSIP at a time

prior to the implementation of such changes.

(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia

District, A/SLMR No. 673)

45 16 24 Failure to Cooperate

No Entries

45 20 00 Jurisdictional Questions

Due to the pendency of the issue of whether an Agency Head's

Sec. 3(b)(4) determination, in another case, was arbitrary

or capricious, the A/S found that the issuance of a bargaining order in this matter running to the Complainant

would be inappropriate until such time as the question of

whether the Complainant is currently the exclusive representative of the employees involved is resolved. (Dept,

of Agric. and Off. of Investigation, A/SLMR No. 555)

45 20 00

45 16 00 Remedies for Improper Conduct (Cont'd)

109

50 04 00 Notification and Dissemination of Remedies

No Entries

50 08 00 Advice of Compliance

No Entries

50 12 00 Remedies for Improper Rules, Regulations and Orders

No Entries

50 16 28

50 00 00 REMEDIAL ORDERS AGAINST LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; UNFAIR

LABOR PRACTICES

50 16 04 Interference

No Entries

50 16 08 Harassment of Employee in Performance of

Duties

No Entries

50 16 12 Inducing Management to Coerce an Employee

No Entries

50 16 16 Strike Activity

No Entries

50 16 20 Discrimination

No Entries

50 16 24 Failure to Consult, Confer or Negotiate

No Entries

50 16 28 Denial of Membership

No Entries

6-30-76 III

55 04 00 Effect on Representation and Unfair Labor Practice

Cases

No Entries

55 08 00 Procedure

55 08 04 Jurisdiction

No Entries

55 08 08 Bill of Rights

No Entries

55 08 12 Elections

A labor organization violated the EG and the

Regs in the way its mail ballot election was

conducted in that it (1 ) failed to provide

adequate safeguards to insure a fair election

by allowing persons other than those named as

election tellers, pursuant to the labor organization's constitution and by-laws, to retain

custody of used and unused ballots and to receive cast ballots; (2) failed to establish a

system to verify voter eligibility; (3) failed

to establish adequate security for the ballots

prior to the time they were tallied; (4) failed

to make an accurate accounting of the ballots

at any stage of the election; and (5) failed

to provide a method whereby a member who did

not receive a ballot in the mail could receive

another ballot. An additional violation involved the use of union funds to support the

candidacy of the incumbent president whose

signature appeared at the bottom of each ballot

beneath a message imploring members to participate in the election. The A/S noted that such

improper conduct violated Sec. 18 of the EC

and Part 204 of the Regs and that such improper

conduct may have had an effect on the outcome

of said election. The A/S ordered that the

mail ballot election be declared null and void

with respect to all the contested offices

and that a new election be conducted

55 08 12

55 00 00 STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

113
55 12 20

under the supervision of the Director, LMSE,

in accordance with Sec. 204.29 of the Regs.

(NTEU, Chapter 034 and Acting Director, Off.

of Labor-Management Standards Enforcement,

Dept, of Labor, A/SLMR No. 658)

55 12 00 Bill of Rights

55 12 04 Equal Rights

No Entries

55 12 08 Freedom of Speech

No Entries

55 12 12 Dues, Initiation Fees and Assessments

No Entries

55 12 16 Protection of the Right to Sue

No Entries

55 12 20 Safeguards against Improper Disciplinary

Action

No Entries

55 08 12 Election (Cont'd)

114 6-30-76

60 16 00

60 00 00 GRIEVABILITY AND ARBITRABILITY

60 04 00 General

The A/s agreed with the ALJ that the Application for

Decision on Grievability or Arbitrability should be

dismissed as moot. Subsequent to the hearing in this

case, the Activity had entertained the grievance and

decided it on the merits. (Dept, of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Border Patrol, El Paso,

Tex., A/SLMR No. 639)

60 08 00 13(a)

The A/S agreed with the ALJ that the grievances in this

case, involving the Activity's failure to adhere to the

principle and the spirit of the promotion system, as

expressed in the Division Mertit Promotion Plan, in filling a vacant position at the Activity and in filling

another position by lateral transfer, were not grievable

under the parties* negotiated agreement as they did not

involve matters which were subject to the parties' negotiated grievance procedure. (Dept, of Commerce, Bureau

of the Census, Data Preparation Div., Jeffersonville,

Ind., A/SLMR No. 665)

60 12 00 13(b)

No Entries

60 16 00 13(d)

Grievance over Activity's failure to consult with union

concerning selection of individual to fill position of

Deputy EEC Officer found not grievable where nothing in

agreement granted union right to be consulted about selection of employee to fill this position. (Navy, Naval Avionics Facility, Indianapolis, Ind., A/SLMR No, 635)

The A/s agreed with the ALJ that the grievances in this

case, involving the Activity's failure to adhere to the

principle and the spirit of the promotion system, as

expressed in the Division Merit Promotion Plan, in filling a vacant position at the Activity and in filling

another position by a lateral transfer, were not grievable under the parties' negotiated agreement as they

did not involve matters which were subject to the parties' negotiated grievance procedure. (Dept, of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Data Preparation Div.,

Jeffersonville, Ind., A/SIiMR No. 665)

6-30-76 116

ALPHABETICAL TABLE OF DECISIONS

OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR

FOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

JULY I, 1975 - JUNE 30, 1976

6-30-76 118

TABLE OF DECISIONS OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY

ALPHABETICAL LISTING \J

TITLE A/SLMRNo(s). 1/

Agriculture, Department of

-- Agricultural Research Service,

Budget and Finance Division, Accounting

Services Branch, New Orleans, La, 579

-- Department of Agriculture and

Office of Investigation 555

— Department of Agriculture and

Office of Investigation and

Office of Audit 643

-- Forest Service

-- Pacific Southwest and Range

Experiment Station, Berkeley, Cal. 573

-- Regional Office, Juneau, Alas. 595

-- Salmon National Forest, Salmon, Ida. 556

-- Wolf Creek Job Corps Civilian

Conservation Center and Umpqua National

Forest, Roseburg, Ore. 567

-- Grain Division Field Office,

New Orleans, La. 666

-- Office of Investigation, Temple, Tex. 644

Air Force, Department of

-- Aeronautical Systems Division, Air Force

Systems Command, Wright-Patterson

Air Force Base, Ohio 590

1/ To facilitate reference, listings in this Table contain only key words

in the case title. For complete official case captions, see Numerical

Table of Cases.

2/ During the period covered by this Supplement, where the FLRC modified

or remanded an A/S decision, the case number of the original A/S

decision (A/SLMR No., or, in the event of an unpublished Request for

Review action, the Area Office (AO) case number) is enclosed in parentheses, followed by the FLRC No. and by the A/SLMR No. of any subsequent

A/S decision.

6-30-76 ]^20
— Electronics Systems Division (AFSC),

Hanscom Air Force Base

-- Lackland Air Force Base,

Headquarters Military Training Center (ATC),

Lackland Air Force Base, Tex.

-- San Antonio Air Logisitics Center,

San Antonio Air Materiel Area (AFLC),

Kelly Air Force Base, Tex.

— Vandenberg Air Force Base,

4392d Aerospace Support Group

Vandenberg Air Force Base, Cal.

— 31st Combat Support Group

Homestead Air Force Base, Fla.

-- 380th Combat Support Group,

Plattsburgh Air Force Base, N.Y.

-- 4392d Aerospace Support Group,

Vandenberg Air Force Base, Cal.

Alabama National Guard

Arizona Air National Guard, Phoenix, Ariz.

Army, Department of

-- Communications Command Agency

Ft. Sam Houston, Tex.

-- Corps of Engineers,

Philadelphia District

-- Criminal Investigation Command

Third Region,

Ft. Gillem, Forest Park, Ga.

-- Electronics Command,

Ft. Monmouth, N.J.

-- Finance and Accounting Center,

Ft. Benjamin Harrison,

Indianapolis, Ind.

-- Fort

-- Benjamin Harrison, Finance and

Accounting Center, Indianapolis, Ind.

riTL.li

Air Force, Department of (cont.)

A/SLMR No(s).

571

652

540

(435, FLRC No. 74A-77, 554)

549, 574, 578

557

537, 623

660

593

604

673

626

617, 653

651

651

121 6-30-76
-- Fort (cont.)

-- Carson, Hq. and Fourth Infantry Division, Hq,

-- Gillem, Criminal Investigation Command,

Third Region, Forest Park, Ga.

McCoy, Sparta, Wise.

-- McPherson, Ga.

— Monmouth, Electronics Command, N.J.

— Sam Houston, Communications

Command Agency, Tex.

-- Reserves,

425th Transportation Command,

Forest Park, III.

— Tank Automotive Command,

Warren, Mich.

-- Watervliet Arsenal,

Watervliet, N.Y.

— Western Area Military Traffic Management

Command, Hq.

Directorate of Personal Property

Oakland Army Base, Oakland, Cal.

Army and Air Force Exchange Service

— Ft. Benning Exchange,

Ft. Benning, Ga.

-- Post Exchange,

Defense Depot, Memphis

— South Texas Area Exchange,

Lackland Air Force Base, Tex.

— Southeast Exchange Region,

Rosewood Warehouse,

Columbia, S.C.

Bellingham Flight Service Station (See:

Federal Aviation Administration)

TITLE

Army, Department of (cont.)

A/SLMR No(s),

544

626

638

586, 655

617, 653

604

636

659, 662

624

591

592

545

(542, FLRC No. 75A-93, 669)

656

6-30-76

122
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (See:

Treasury, Department of)

Civil Service Commission

-- Civil Service Commission and

Internal Revenue Service

Washington, D.C. 642

-- Washington, D.C. 640

Coast Guard Air Station

Non-Appropriated Fund Activity

Cape Cod, Mass. 561

Commerce, Department of

— Bureau of the Census,

Data Preparation Division,

Jeffersonville, Ind. 665

— Merchant Marine Academy,

Kings Point, N.Y. 620

Communications Command Agency, Army,

Ft. Sam Houston, Tex. 604

Criminal Investigation Command, Third Region,

Ft. Gillem, Forest Park, Ga. 626

Defense, Department of

-- Air Force, Department of (See: Air Force)

— Air National Guard, 147th Fighter Group,

Texas Air National Guard,

Austin, Tex. 667

-- Army, Department of (See; Army)

— Army and Air Force Exchange Service (See:

Army and Air Force)

-- Defense Contract Administration

Services Region, Philadelphia 609

-- Defense Contract Audit Agency 657

-- Defense Contract Audit Agency,

Chicago Region, 111. , 610

TITLE A/SLMR No(s).

123 6-30-76
-- Defense Supply Agency

-- Defense Contract Administration

Services Region,

Los Angeles, Cal.

-- Defense Contract Administration

Services Region, San Francisco

-- Defense Contract Administration

Services Region, San Francisco,

Defense Contract Administration

Services District, Seattle, Wash.

— Defense Property Disposal Office,

Aberdeen Proving Ground,

Aberdeen, Md.

-- Navy, Department of (See: Navy)

-- State of New Jersey

Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center,

St. Louis, Mo.

Defense Supply Agency (See: Defense, Department of)

Denver Airway Facilities Hub Sector,

Transportation, Rocky Mountain Region,

Aurora, Colo.

Electronics Command, Army,

Ft. Monmouth, N.J.

Electronics Systems Division (AFSC),

Air Force, Hanscom Air Force Base

Energy Research and Development Administration, Hq.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VII, Kansas City, Mo.

Federal Aviation Administration (See:

Transportation, Department of)

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.,

New York Region

TITLE

Defense, Department of (cont.)

A/SLMR No(s).

633

559

564

(360, FLRC No. 74A-22, 615)

(323, FLRC No. 73A-59, 539)

569

535

617, 653

571

634

668

580

6-30-76 124
t i t l e A/SLMR No (s )

Federal Energy Administration

-- Region IV, Atlanta, Ga. 5^2.

-- Washington, D.C.

Finance and Accounting Center, Army,

Ft. Benjamin Harrison,

Indianapolis, Ind. ^52^

Forest Service (See: Agriculture, Department of)

Fort (See: Army, and Army and Air Force)

General Services Administration

-- Region 3

-- Region 3, Public Buildings Service,

Central Support Field Office 583

-- Region 4 661

-- Regional Office, Region 4 575

Health, Education and Welfare, Department of

-- Office of the Secretary, Hq., Washington, D.C. 596, 648

-- Public Health Service Indian Hospital,

Claremore, Okla. 568

-- Social and Rehabilitation Service,

Central Office, Washington, D.C. • 632

-- Social Security Administration

-- Bureau of District Office Operations,

Boston, Mass. 563

-- Bureau of Field Operations,

Boston Region,

District and Branch Offices 562

-- Bureau of Field Operations,

District Office,

Minneapolis, Minn. 621

125 6-30-76
Health, Education and Welfare, Department of (cont.)

-- Social Security Administration (cont.)

-- Bureau of Hearings and Appeals,

Puerto Rico

-- Mid-America Program Center, BRSI,

Kansas City, Mo. 619

Housing and Urban Development, Department of

-- Des Moines Insuring Office 641

-- Federal Housing Administration,

Fargo Insuring Office,

Fargo, N. Dak. 645

TITLE A/SLMR No(s).

Illinois Air National Guard

The Adjutant General, 111.

Interior, Department of

598

-- Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Fairbanks Agency Office, Alas. 607

-- Bureau of Reclamation,

Arizona Projects Office,

Phoenix, Ariz. 614

Internal Revenue Service (See: Treasury, Department of)

Justice, Department of

-- Immigration and Naturalization Service,

Border Patrol, El Paso, Tex. 639

Labor, Department of

-- Labor-Management Standards Enforcement, Office of,

and National Treasury Employees Union, Ch. 034 658

Lackland Air Force Base,

Military Training Center (ATC), Hq.

Lackland Air Force Base, Tex. 652

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Tex. and

National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

Washington, D.C. (457, FLRC No. 74A-95, 566)

6-30-76 126
TITLE A/SLMR No(s).

Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Navy,

Vallejo, Cal.

Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro

Military Sealift Command, Navy

National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

Washington, D.C. and Lyndon B. Johnson

Space Center, Houston, Tex.

National Guard

-- Adjutant General

Illinois Air National Guard

-- Alabama National Guard

-- Arizona Air National Guard,

Phoenix, Ariz.

-- Texas Air National Guard,

Austin, Tex.

National Labor Relations Board, Region 17 and

National Labor Relations Board

National Park Service

National Treasury Employees Union, Ch. 034 and

Acting Director, Office of Labor-Management

Standards Enforcement, Department of Labor

Navy, Department of

-- Commissary Store Complex, Oakland

-- Exchange, Miramar, Cal.

-- Mare Island Naval Shipyard,

Vallejo, Cal.

-- Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro

-- Military Sealift Command

-- Naval Aerospace and Regional Medical Center,

and Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory,

and Naval Aerospace Medical Institute, Pensacola, Fla,

546, 570

560

576

(457, FLRC No. 74A-95, 566)

598

660

593

667

664, 670, 671

589

658

654

602

570, 646

560

576

603

127 6-30-76
-- Naval Air Rework Facility

-- Naval Air Rework Facility

-- Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Fla.

-- Pensacola, Fla.

-- Naval Air Station 

Fallon, Nev.

-- Naval Avionics Facility, Indianapolis, Ind.

-- Naval Electronics Laboratory Center,

San Diego, Cal.

-- Naval Ordnance Station, Louisville, Ky,

-- Naval Station and Naval Amphibious Base,

San Diego, Cal., and Coronado, Cal.

-- Naval Support Activity, Long Beach, Cal.

-- Naval Undersea Center, San Diego, Cal.

-- Naval Weapons Station, Concord, Cal.

-- Norfolk Naval Shipyard

-- Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Va.

-- Philadelphia Naval Regional Medical Center

-- Public Works Center, San Francisco Bay

-- Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,

Bremerton, Wash.

0

-- Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion 

and Repair, USN

-- Long Beach, Cal.

-- 8th Naval District, New Orleans, La.

TITLE

Navy, Department o f (cont.)

543

613

608

(432, FLRC No. 74A-80, 587)

635

622

(400, FLRC No. 74A-54, 588)

627

629

584

577

547, 548

618

558

628

582

A/SLMR No(s).

594

572

6-30-76 128
TITLE A/SLMR No(s)

Orange-Chatham Comprehensive

Health Services, Inc. 650

Philadelphia Naval Regional Medical Center, Navy 558

Public Works Center, Navy, San Francisco Bay 628

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Navy,

Bremerton, Wash. 582

Quantico Education Association 601

Reserves, Army,

425th Transportation Command

Forest Park, 111. 636

San Antonio Air Logistics Center,

San Antonio Air Materiel Area (AFLC)

Kelly Air Force Base, Tex, 540

Small Business Administration,

Central Office, Washington, D.C. 631

Social Security Administration (See: Health,

Education and Welfare, Department of)

Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion

and Repair, Navy

— 8th Naval District

New Orleans, La. 572

— Long Beach, Cal. 594

Tank Automotive Command, Warren, Mich. 659, 662

Transportation, Department of

-- Coast Guard Air Station,

Non-Appropriated Fund Activity,

Cape Cod, Mass. 561

-- Federal Aviation Administration

-- Airway Facilities Sector 37, Tampa, Fla. 647

129

-- Airways Facilities Division,

Alaskan Region

-- Bellingham Flight Service Station,

Bellingham, Wash.

6-30-76
Transportation, Department of (cont).

-- Federal Aviation Administration (cont).

-- Denver Airway Facilities Hub Sector,

Rocky Mountain Region,

Aurora, Colo. 535

-- Eastern Region 585

-- Federal Aviation Administration

and Federal Aviation Administration,

Eastern Region 600

-- Muskegon Air Traffic Control Tower 534

-- National Aviation Facilities

Experimental Center,

Atlantic City, N.J. 606

-- Federal Highway Administration,

Office of Federal Highway Projects,

Vancouver, Wash. 612

-- Office of the Secretary 672

Treasury, Department of

-- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

Washington, D.C. 538

-- Internal Revenue Service 536, 550

-- Internal Revenue Service

-- Hartford District Office 649

-- Internal Revenue Service

and Civil Service Commission 642

— National Office, Washington, D.C. 630

-- Office of the Regional Commissioner,

Southeast Region 565

Vandenberg Air Force Base, Cal.

-- 4392d Aerospace Support Group 537^ 554^ 623

TITLE A/SLMR No(s).

6-30-76

130
Veterans Administration

-- Center

— Bath, N.Y.

— Wadsworth Hospital

-- Data Processing Center,

Austin, Tex,

-- Domiciliary, White City, Ore.

-- Hospital

-- New Orleans, La.

-- Palo Alto, Cal.

-- San Francisco, Cal.

-- Tampa, Fla.

Watervliet Arsenal, Army, Watervliet, N.Y.

TITLE A/SLMR No(s).

605

546

(523, FLRC No. 75A-80, 663)

581

637

552

553

551

624

131 6-30-76

NUMERICAL TABLE OF DECISIONS

OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF LABOR

FOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

JULY 1, 1975 - JUNE 30, 1976

6-30-76

NUMERICAL LISTING, DATES OF ISSUANCE AND SECTIONS OF DIGEST INVOLVED

Section(s) of Digest

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued Involved 1/

534. Federal Aviation Administration, 35 28 16; 35 32 GO

Muskegon Air Traffic Control Tower

(7-29-75)

535. Denver Airway Facilities Hub Sector 10 24 12; 35 28 08

FAA, Rocky Mountain Region, DOT

Aurora, Colorado

(7-29-75)

536. Internal Revenue Service 40 20 00 

(7-29-75)

537. Department of the Air Force, 35 08 04, 35 12 00

4392d Aerospace Support Group,

Vandenberg Air Force Base, California

(7-30-75)

538. Department of the Treasury, 25 20 00

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco

and Firearms,

Washington, D.C.

(7-30-75)

539. Department of Defense, 35 08 04; 35 28 36

State of New Jersey

(7-30-75)

540. San Antonio Air Logistics Center, 35 08 04; 35 28 28

San Antonio Air Materiel Area (AFLC),

Kelly Air Force Base, Texas

(7-30-75)

541. Federal Energy Administration, 35 08 04; 35 08 12

Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia

(7-31-75)

542. Army and Air Force Exchange Service, 35 08 04; 35 24 00;

South Texas Area Exchange, 35 28 28; 45 16 16

Lackland Air Force Base, Texas

(7-31-75)

TABLE OF DECISIONS OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY

Listing includes all Sections involved except Section 20 20 00,

"Employee Categories and Classifications," in which entries are

listed alphabetically. In this connection, it should be noted that

those decisions which reflect ^ digest entries are, in fact, digested under Section 20 20 00»

6-30-76 135
543. Department of Navy,

Naval Air Rework Facility

(7-31-75)

544. Department of the Army,

Headquarters, Fort Carson and

Headquarters, Fourth Infantry

Division (Mechanized)

(8-28-75)

545. Army and Air Force Exchange Service,

Post Exchange,

Defense Depot Memphis

(8-28-75)

546. Veterans Administration,

Wadsworth Hospital Center

(8-28-75)

547. Department of the Navy,

Norfolk Naval Shipyard

(8-28-75)

548. Department of the Navy,

Norfolk Naval Shipyard

(8-28-75)

549. Department of the Air Force,

31st Combat Support Group,

Homestead Air Force Base,

Homestead, Florida

(8-28-75)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

35 08 04; 35 08 08

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

20 04 04; 20 04 08;

20 04 12; 20 12 60

25 20 00

05 08 00; 35 08 04;

35 12 00; 35 24 00

10 24 12; 20 16 04

550. Department of the Treasury,

Internal Revenue Service

(8-28-75)

35 28 12

551. Veterans Administration Hospital,

(8-29-75)

20 16 08

552. Veterans Administration Hospital,

Palo Alto, California

(8-29-75)

553. Veterans Administration Hospital,

San Francisco, California

(8-29-75)

554. Vandenberg AFB,

4392d Aerospace Support Group,

Vandenberg AFB, California

(8-29-75)

35 28 04; 35 28 08

136 6-30-76
555. Department of Agriculture and

Office of Investigation

(8-29-75)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

35 28 28; 45 16 20;

45 20 00

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

556. United States Forest Service,

Salmon National Forest,

Salmon, Idaho

(9-16-75)

557. United States Air Force,

380th Combat Support Group,

Plattsburgh Air Force Base, N.Y.

(9-16-75)

558. Department of the Navy,

Philadelphia Naval Regional

Medical Center

(9-16-75)

20 16 12; 25 20 00

30 04 00-

20 16 08; 25 20 00

559. Defense Supply Agency,

Defense Contract Administration

Services Region, San Francisco

(9-16-75)

20 04 08; 20 04 12;

20 12 20

560. U.S. Marine Corps Air Station,

El Toro

(9-30-75)

35 08 04; 35 12 00;

35 28 08

561. United States Coast Guard

Air Station,

Non-Appropriated Fund Activity,

Cape Cod, Massachusetts

(9-30-75)

562. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Social Security Administration

Bureau of Field Operations,

Boston Region,

District and Branch Offices

(9-30-75)

563. Bureau of District Office Operations,

Social Security Administration,

Department of Health, Education and

Welfare,

Boston, Massachusetts

(9-30-75)

10 04 08; 10 04 16;

20 16 28; 25 20 00;

25 24 00

25 20 00

35 12 00

6-30-76 137
564. Defense Supply Agency, 20 12 28; 20 12 56

Defense Contract Administration

Services Region (DCASR),

San Francisco,

Defense Contract Administration

Services District (DCASD),

Seattle, Washington

(9-30-75)

565. Internal Revenue Service, 20 12 28

Office of the Regional Commissioner,

Southeast Region

(9-30-75)

566. National Aeronautics and Space 35 08 04; 35 28 16;

Administration (NASA), 35 28 32

Washington, D.C.

and

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (NASA),

Houston, Texas

(10-24-75)

567. United States Department of Agriculture, 20 04 08; 20 04 12;

Forest Service, Wolf Creek Job Corps 20 12 08

Civilian Conservation Center and

United States Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Umpqua National Forest,

Roseburg, Oregon

(10-24-75)

568. Department of Health, Education, and 10 24 12; 10 44 00;

Welfare, Public Health Service 15 16 00

Indian Hospital,

Claremore, Oklahoma

(10-24-75)

569. Defense Mapping Agency Aerospace Center, 15 12 00; 20 04 04;

St. Louis, Missouri 20 12 08; 20 16 20

(10-24-75)

570. Department of the Navy 35 08 04; 35 12 00;

Mare Island Naval Shipyard, 35 20 00; 35 32 00

Vallejo, California

(10-31-75)

571. United States Air Force Electronics 35 28 12

Systems Division (AFSC), Hanscom

Air Force Base

(10-31-75)

SectioTi(s) of Digest

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued Involved

138 6-30-76
572. U.S. Department of Navy, 25 24 00

Supervisor of Shipbuilding,

Conversion and Repair,

8th Naval District,

New Orleans, Louisiana

(10-31-75)

573. United States Department of Agriculture, 25 16 00; 35 08 04;

Forest Service, 35 28 36

Pacific Southwest and Range

Experiment Station,

Berkeley, California

(10-31-75)

574. Department of the Air Force, 35 08 04; 35 24 00;

Headquarters, 31st Combat Support 35 28 04

Group, Homestead Air Force Base,

Homestead, Florida

(10-31-75)

575. General Services Administration, 20 12 20

Regional Office, Region 4

(10-31-75)

576. Department of Navy, 10 04 24

Military Sealift Command

(10-31-75)

577. Department of the Navy, 35 08 04; 35 28 28

Naval Weapons Station,

Concord, California

(10-31-75)

578. Department of the Air Force, 35 08 04; 35 12 00

Headquarters, 31st Combat Support

Group (TAC),

Homestead Air Force Base, Florida

(11-26-75)

579. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 10 04 04; 20 04 04;

Agricultural Research Service, 20 12 32; 20 12 44

Budget and Finance Division,

Accounting Services Branch,

New Orleans, Louisiana

(11-26-75)

580. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 35 08 04; 35 12 00

New York Region

(11-26-75)

Section(s) of Digest

A/SLMR No,, Case Name and Date Issued Involved

6-30-76 139
581. Veterans Administration Domiciliary,

White City, Oregon

(11-26-75)

582. Department of the Navy,

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,

Bremerton, Washington

(11-26-75)

583. General Services Administration,

Region y. Public Buildings Service,

Central Support Field Office

(11-26-75)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

35 08 04; 35 12 00

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

35 08 04

30 04 00; 35 28 08;

45 16 20

584. Department of the Navy,

Naval Undersea Center,

San Diego, California

(11-26-75)

25 24 00

585. Department of Transportation,

Federal Aviation Administration,

Eastern Region

(11-26-75)

35 12 00

586. Department of the Army,

Fort McPherson, Georgia

(11-26-75)

587. Department of the Navy,

Naval Air Station,

Fallon, Nevada

(11-26-75)

588. United States Department of the Navy,

Naval Ordnance Station,

Louisville, Kentucky

(11-26-75)

589. National Park Service

(12-10-75)

590. Department of the Air Force,

Aeronautical Systems Division,

Air Force Systems Command,

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio

(12-10-75)

591. Department of Army,

Headquarters, Western Area Military

Traffic Management Command,

Directorate of Personal Property,

Oakland Army Base, Oakland, California

(12-10-75)

15 28 00

35 08 04; 35 28 32

05 08 00;

35 28 32;

45 16 20

10 04 08

10 04 20

10 44 00

10 04 16;

20 04 16;

25 20 00

35 08 04;

45 16 04;

10 04 16;

10 24 12;

20 16 08

10 04 20;

20 16 08;

20 04 04; 20 12 12

'6
592. Army and Air Force Exchange Service,

Fort Benning Exchange,

Fort Benning, Georgia

(12-10-75)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

10 04 20; 15 08 04;

20 04 08; 20 12 48

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

593. Arizona Air National Guard,

Phoenix, Arizona

(12-10-75)

10 24 12; 25 20 00

594. Department of the Navy,

Supervisor of Shipbuilding,

Conversion and Repair, USN,

Long Beach, California

(12-10-75)

595, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service,

Regional Office,

Juneau, Alaska

(12-10-75)

35 12 00; 35 28 00;

35 32 00

596. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Office of the Secretary,

Headquarters

(12-10-75)

25 20 00

597. Bellingham Flight Service Station,

Federal Aviation AdministrationN.W. Region,

Department of Transportation,

Bellingham, Washington

(12-10-75)

05 36 00; 30 12 04;

35 08 04; 35 20 00

The Adjutant General, 35 08 04;; 35 28 08;

State of Illinois, 45 16 20

Illinois Air National Guard

(12-16-75)

Federal Aviation Administration, 15 24 00;; 20 04 04;

Airways Facilities Division, 20 04 08;; 20 04 1 2;

Alaskan Region 20 12 32

(12-18-75)

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 10 12 00 15 24 00;

and 20 04 04 20 04 08;

Federal Aviation Administration, 20 04 12 20 04 20;

Eastern Region 20 12 28 20 12 32;

(12-18-75) 20 16 20 20 24 04;

20 24 08 25 04 08

6-30-76 141
601. Quantico Education Association

(1-5-76)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

40 32 00

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

602. Department of the Navy,

Navy Exchange,

Miramar, California

(1-5-76)

603. Naval Aerospace and Regional Medical

Center, Pensacola, Florida

and

Naval Aerospace Medical Research

Laboratory, Pensacola, Florida

and

Naval Aerospace Medical Institute,

Pensacola, Florida

(1-5-76)

604. U.S. Army Communications

Command Agency,

Fort Sam Houston, Texas

(1-5-76)

605. Veterans Administration Center,

Bath, New York

(1-26-76)

10 24 12

10 04 08; 20 16 28

10 24 12; 20 16 28

10 16 00 

15 08 04

20 12 08

25 04 04

10 36 00 

15 16 00

20 16 20

606. Federal Aviation Administration,

National Aviation Facilities

Experimental Center,

Atlantic City, New Jersey

(1-26-76)

607. Department of Interior,

Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Fairbanks Agency Office,

Fairbanks, Alaska

(1-26-76)

608. Naval Air Rework Facility,

Pensacola, Florida

(1-26-76)

609. Defense Contract Administration

Services Region (DCASR),

Philadelphia

(1-26-76)

10 12 00; 20 04 04;

20 16 16; 20 16 20;

20 16 28

20 12 20

35 08 04; 35 28 28

10 04 16; 20 12 40;

20 16 08

142 6-30-76
610, Defense Contract Audit Agency,

Chicago Region,

Chicago, Illinois

(1-27-76)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

611. Federal Energy Administration,

Washington, D.C.

(1-27-76)

20 12 04; 20 12 20;

20 12 28; 20 12 60

612. U.S. Department of Transportation,

Federal Highway Administration,

Office of Federal Highway Projects,

Vancouver, Washington

(2-2-76)

35 08 04; 35 28 12

613. Naval Air Rework Facility,

Naval Air Station,

Jacksonville, Florida

(2-2-76)

25 08 12

614. Department of Interior,

Bureau of Reclamation,

Arizona Projects Office,

Phoenix, Arizona

(2-10-76)

615. Defense Supply Agency,

Defense Property Disposal Office,

Aberdeen Proving Ground,

Aberdeen, Maryland

(2-17-76)

10 04 08; 10 04 20;

10 24 12

30 28 00; 35 24 00;

35 28 20; 35 28 28;

45 16 16

616. General Services Administration,

Region 3

(2-17-76)

617. Department of the Army,

U.S. Army Electronics Command,

Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

(2-17-76)

618. Norfolk Naval Shipyard,

Portsmouth, Virginia

(2-17-76)

619. Social Security Administration,

Mid-America Program Center, BRSI,

Kansas City, Missouri

(2-26-76)

20 04 04; 20 04 08;

20 04 12; 20 12 36;

20 12 64

10 04 08; 35 16 00

35 12 00

35 12 00; 35 28 36;

35 32 00

6-30-76 143
620. U.S. Department of Commerce,

U.S. Merchant Marine Academy,

Kings Point, New York

(2-26-76)

A/SLMR No.) Case Name and Date Issued

35 24 00; 35 28 24

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

621. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Social Security Administration,

Bureau of Field Operations,

District Office,

Minneapolis, Minnesota

(2-26-76)

622. Department of the Navy

Naval Electronics Laboratory Center,

San Diego, California

(3-3-76)

623. Department of the Air Force,

4392d Aerospace Support Group,

Vandenberg Air Force Base, California

(3-3-76)

624. Department of Army,

Watervliet Arsenal,

Watervliet, New York

(3-23-76)

625. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Social Security Administration,

Bureau of Hearings and Appeals,

Puerto Rico

(3-23-76)

626. United States Army,

Criminal Investigation Command

Third Region,

Fort Gillem, Forest Park, Georgia

(3-23-76)

627. Department of the Navy,

U.S. Naval Station and

Naval Amphibious Base,

San Diego, California, and

Coronado, California

(3-23-76)

20 04 04; 20 04 08;

20 04 12; 20 12 44;

20 12 64

30 04 00; 35 28 08;

35 28 20; 35 28 24

30 28 00; 35 28 28

25 20 00

05 08 00; 15 28 00

10 24 12

20 04 04

20 04 12

10 44 00;

20 04 08;

20 12 64

144 6-30-76
628. Navy Public Works Center,

San Francisco Bay

(3-26-76)

629. Department of the Navy,

Naval Support Activity,

Long Beach, California

(3-26-76)

630. Internal Revenue Service,

National Office,

Washington, D.C.

(3-26-76)

631. U.S. Small Business Administration,

Central Office,

Washington, D.C.

(3-26-76)

632. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Social and Rehabilitation

Service, Central Office,

Washington, D.C.

(3-26-76)

633. Defense Supply Agency,

Defense Contract Administration

Services Region,

Los Angeles, California

(3-26-76)

634. Energy Research and Development

Administration, Headquarters

(3-30-76)

635. Department of the Navy,

Naval Avionics Facility,

Indianapolis, Indiana

(3-30-76)

636. Department of the Army,

U.S. Army Reserves,

425th Transportation Command,

. Forest Park, Illinois

(3-30-76)

A/SLMR No., Case Name and Date Issued

10 04 08; 10 04 20;

20 16 28

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

20 04 04

20 04 12

20 16 16

25 20 00

20 04 08;

20 16 08;

25 20 00

35 08 04; 45 16 04

10 04 16; 10 04 20;

20 16 08; 25 20 00;

25 24 00

35 08 04; 35 12 00;

35 28 16

60 16 00

20 04 04; 20 04 08;

20 04 12; 20 12 16

6-30-76 145
637, V e t e r a n s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n H o s p i t a l , 

N e w O r l e a n s , L o u i s i a n a 

(4 - 30-76)

A/SLMR N o . , Case Name and Date Issued

10 24 12

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

638. D e p a r t m e n t of the Army, 

F o r t M e Coy,

Spa r t a , W i s c o n s i n 

(4-30-76)

10 04 20; 25 24 00

639. U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of J u s t i c e ,

I m m i g r a t i o n and N a t u r a l i z a t i o n S e r v i c e , 

B o r d e r Pa t r o l , El Paso, T e x a s 

(4-30-76)

60 04 00

6 4 0 . U.S. C i v i l S e r v i c e C o m m i s s i o n , 

W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.

(4-30-76)

05 04 00 

30 20 00 

35 28 16

05 08 00; 

35 08 04; 

35 28 36

641. D e p a r t m e n t of H o u s i n g and 

U r b a n D e v e l o p m e n t ,

De s M o i n e s I n s u r i n g O f f ice, 

(4-30-76)

35 08 04; 35 12 00

642. U.S. C ivil S e r v i c e C o m m i s s i o n 

and

I n t e r n a l R e v e n u e S e r vice, 

W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.

( 4-30-76)

05 04 00 

30 04 00 

35 28 16

05 20 00; 

35 08 04; 

35 32 00

643. U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of A g r i c u l t u r e 

and

O f f i c e of I n v e s t i g a t i o n 

and

O f f i c e of A u d i t 

(5-11-76)

05 08 00; 35 08 04; 

35 24 00; 35 28 04

644. U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of A g r i c u l t u r e , 

O f f i c e of I n v e s t i g a t i o n ,

T e m p l e , Te x a s 

( 5-11-76)

05 08 00

645. D e p a r t m e n t of H o u s i n g and U r b a n 

D e v e l o p m e n t , F e d e r a l H o u s i n g 

A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , F a r g o I n s u r i n g Office, 

F argo, N o r t h D a k o t a 

(5-11-76)

146 6-30-76
646. D e p a r t m e n t of the N a vy, 35 08 04; 35 24 00; 

M a r e I s l a n d N a v a l S h i p y a r d , 35 28 32

V a l l e j o , C a l i f o r n i a 

(5-11-76)

647. F e d e r a l A v i a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 10 28 00 

A i r w a y F a c i l i t i e s S e c t o r 37,

Tampa, F l o r i d a 

(5-11-76)

648. D e p a r t m e n t of H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and 25 20 00 

W e l f a r e , O f f i c e of S e c r e t a r y ,

H e a d q u a r t e r s , W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.

(5-11-76)

649. I n t e r n a l R e v e n u e S e r v i c e , 35 28 16 

D e p a r t m e n t of the T r e a s u r y ,

H a r t f o r d D i s t r i c t O f f i c e 

(5-19-76)

650. O r a n g e - C h a t h a m C o m p r e h e n s i v e 05 08 00 

H e a l t h S e r v i c e s , I n c o r p o r a t e d

(5-19-76)

651. U.S. A r m y F i n a n c e and A c c o u n t i n g 35 04 08; 35 28 28; 

C enter, F o r t B e n j a m i n H a r r i s o n , 45 16 20 

I n d i a n a p o l i s , I n d i a n a

(5-19-76)

652. U n i t e d S t a t e s Ai r Force, 35 08 04; 35 28 16 

L a c k l a n d A i r F o r c e Base,

H e a d q u a r t e r s M i l i t a r y T r a i n i n g 

C e n t e r (ATC),

L a c k l a n d A i r F o r c e Base, Te x a s 

(5-19-76)

653. U.S. A r m y E l e c t r o n i c s C ommand, 35 28 28; 45 16 20 

F o r t M o n m o u t h , N e w J e r s e y

(5-25-76)

654. D e p a r t m e n t of the Navy, 10 16 00; 10 28 00; 

N a v y C o m m i s s a r y S t o r e Comp l e x , 25 08 00; 35 16 00; 

O a k l a n d 45 16 00 

( 5 - 28-76)

Section(s) of Digest

A/SLMR N o . , Case Name and Date Issued Involved

6-30-76 147
655. D e p a r t m e n t of the Army,

F o r t M c P h e r s o n , G e o r g i a 

(5-28-76)

656. S o u t h e a s t E x c h a n g e R e g i o n of the 

A r m y and Ai r F o r c e E x c h a n g e S e r v i c e , 

R o s e w o o d W a r e h o u s e ,

C o l u m b i a , S o u t h C a r o l i n a 

(5-28-76)

657. D e f e n s e C o n t r a c t A u d i t A g e n c y 

(6-4-76)

658. N a t i o n a l T r e a s u r y E m p l o y e e s 

U n ion, C h a p t e r 034

and

A c t i n g D i r e c t o r ,

O f f i c e of L a b o r - M a n a g e m e n t 

S t a n d a r d s E n f o r c e m e n t ,

U.S. Department of Labor 

(6-4-76)

659. U n i t e d S t a t e s T a n k A u t o m o t i v e 

C o m m a n d , W a r r e n , M i c h i g a n 

(6-4-76)

660. A l a b a m a N a t i o n a l G u a r d 

(6-4-76)

661. G e n e r a l S e r v i c e s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 

R e g i o n 4

(6-11-76)

662. U n i t e d S t a t e s A r m y T a n k 

A u t o m o t i v e C o m mand,

Warren, Michigan 

(6-11-76)

663. V e t e r a n s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,

Veterans Administration Data 

Processing Center,

Au s t i n , Te x a s 

(6-15-76)

664. N a t i o n a l L a b o r R e l a t i o n s Board, 

R e g i o n 17, and N a t i o n a l L a b o r 

R e l a t i o n s B o a r d

(6-21-76)

A/SLMR N o . , Case Name and Date Issued

10 04 1'6; 20 16 08; 

20 16 28; 25 20 00

Section(s) of Digest

Involved

35 28 08; 35 28 12; 

45 04 00; 45 16 20

10 04 08

55 08 12

35 28 28

35 28 12

15 08 08; 20 04 04; 

20 04 08; 20 04 12

30 28 00

35 08 04; 35 28 32; 

45 10 00

35 20 00

148 6-30-76
665. U n i t e d S t a t e s D e p a r t m e n t of C o m m e r c e , 60 08 00; 60 16 00 

B u r e a u of the C e n sus,

D a t a P r e p a r a t i o n D i v i s i o n ,

J e f f e r s o n v i l l e , I n d i a n a 

(6-21-76)

666. U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of A g r i c u l t u r e , 05 08 00; 35 28 08 

G r a i n D i v i s i o n F i e l d O f f i c e ,

N e w O r l e a n s , L o u i s i a n a 

(6-22-76)

667. D e p a r t m e n t of D e f e n s e , 35 08 04; 35 12 00 

A ir N a t i o n a l Guar d ,

1 4 7 t h F i g h t e r Group,

T e x a s A i r N a t i o n a l Guard,

A u s t i n , T e x a s 

(6-22-76)

668. E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y , 35 28 12; 35 28 28 

R e g i o n VII,

K a n s a s City, M i s s o u r i 

(6-22-76)

669. A r m y and A i r F o r c e E x c h a n g e S e r v i c e , 35 08 04; 35 24 00; 

S o u t h T e x a s A r e a E x c h a n g e , 45 16 04 

L a c k l a n d A i r F o r c e Base, Te x a s

(6-22-76)

670. N a t i o n a l L a b o r R e l a t i o n s Board, 35 20 00 

R e g i o n 17, a nd N a t i o n a l L a b o r

R e l a t i o n s B o a r d 

(6-22-76)

671. N a t i o n a l L a b o r R e l a t i o n s Board, 35 08 04; 35 20 00 

R e g i o n 17, an d N a t i o n a l L a b o r

R e l a t i o n s B o a r d 

(6-23-76)

672. D e p a r t m e n t of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 35 08 04; 45 16 04 

O f f i c e of the S e c r e t a r y of

T r a n s p o r t a t i o n

(6-23-76)

673. U.S. A r m y C o r p s of E n g i n e e r s , 35 28 28; 45 16 20 

P h i l a d e l p h i a D i s t r i c t

( 6 - 23-76)

Section(s) of Digest

A/SLMR N o . , Case Name and Date Issued Involved

6-30-76 1^9

IN D E X

1/

- A -

A B U S E OF A D M I N I S T R A T I V E P R O C E S S 10 28 00

AC P E T I T I O N 10 0 4 20

ACCESS T O W O R K A R E A S , C A M P A I G N I N G 25 08 16; 35 08 00

A C C R E T I O N 20 16 08

A C T I V I T Y P E T I T I O N (RA) 10 04 08

ADDIT I O N S T O U N I T 20 16 08 

ADEQ U A C Y OF

R e c o r d 15 28 00

S h o w i n g o f I n t e r e s t 10 16 00; 20 16 08

A D M I S S I B I L I T Y OF E V I D E N C E A T H E A R I N G S 05 12 08

ADVICE, E R R O N E O U S B Y L M S A A G E N T S 10 24 12

ADVI S O R Y O P I N I O N S 05 16 00 

A GENCY I

A u t h o r i t y to E x c l u d e E m p s f r o m EO 05 08 00

D i r e c t i v e s , U L P 35 04 04; 35 08 04

F a c i l i t i e s for C a m p a i g n i n g 25 08 16

P e t i t i o n (RA) 10 04 08

R e g u l a t i o n s N o t B i n d i n g on A/S 10 04 16; 35 04 04;

25 08 16

Ru les o n C a m p a i g n i n g 25 08 16

_!/ S p e c i f i c e m p l o y e e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s or c a t e g o r i e s , such as " A c c o u n t a n t " 

or " T e m p o r a r y Employeeare i n d e x e d u n d e r " E M P L O Y E E C A T E G O R I E S A N D 

C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S . "

6-30-76 151
A G E N T - P R I N C I P A L 35 08 08

A G R E E M E N T

A c c r e t i o n 10 24 12

A p p r o v a l P e n d i n g at H i g h e r A g e n c y 

L e v e l 10 24 12

Ba r to P e t i t i o n 10 24 12

Bar, U n i l a t e r a l W a i v e r of 10 24 12

E x t e n s i o n as U L P 35 08 04

I n d e f i n i t e D u r a t i o n 10 24 12

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n 30 28 00

P r e m a t u r e E x t e n s i o n 10 24 12

R e f u s a l to S i g n 35 28 00

T e r m i n a b l e at W i l l 10 24 12

U n i l a t e r a l T e r m i n a t i o n 35 28 00

AMENDMENT

Certification

Complaint

Petition 

Recognition 

ANTI-UNION LITERATURE 

APPROPRIATE UNIT 

Accretion 

Activity-wide

Agency Regulations Not Binding 

on A/S

10 04 20

30 08 0 0 ; 30 12 00;

30 16 00

15 08 08

10 04 20

35 08 04; 35 08 08

20 04 00 to 20 12 00

20 16 08

20 12 08

20 04 16

152 6-30-76
A g e n c y - w i d e

A r e a - w i d e

B a s e - w i d e

B r a n c h - w i d e

C i t y - w i d e

C l a r i f i c a t i o n

C o m m a n d - w i d e

C o m m u n i t y o f I n t e r e s t

C r i t e r i a

D i r e c t o r a t e - w i d e 

D i s t r i c t - w i d e 

D i v i s i o n - w i d e 

E f f e c t i v e D e a l i n g s 

E f f i c i e n c y o f O p e r a t i o n s 

E l i g i b i l i t y

E x t e n t o f O r g a n i z a t i o n 

F i e l d - w i d e 

G e o g r a p h i c S c o p e 

H e a d q u a r t e r s - w i d e 

H i s t o r y o f B a r g a i n i n g 

M u l t i - I n s t a l l a t i o n 

N a t i o n - w i d e

O c c u p a t i o n a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s 

One E m p l o y e e 

O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Scope

20 12 04 

20 12 36 

20 12 48 

20 12 44

20 08 16 

25 20 00 

20 12 16 

20 0 4 04 

20 04 00 

20 12 12

20 12 40 

20 12 32 

20 04 08 

20 04 12 

20 16 12

20 04 04 

20 12 24 

20 08 00

20 12 20

20 04 08; 20 12 00 

20 12 56 

20 08 08 

20 12 64 

05 04 00 

20 12 00

6-30-76 153
P a t t e r n at S i m i l a r A c t i v i t i e s 15 12 00

P r e v i o u s C e r t i f i c a t i o n 20 04 20

R e l e v a n c e o f U n i t s E l s e w h e r e 15 12 00

R e g i o n - w i d e 20 12 28

R e s i d u a l E m p l o y e e s 20 16 16

* S c o p e 20

20

08

16

00

00

S e c t i o n - w i d e 20 12 52

S e l f - D e t e r m i n a t i o n 20 16 20

S e v e r a n c e 20 16 04

S i n g l e E m p l o y e e 05 04 00

S i n g l e I n s t a l l a t i o n 20 12 60

S t a t e - w i d e 20 08 12

S t i p u l a t i o n s N o t B i n d i n g o n A/S 20 0 4 16

S u p e r v i s o r s 10 32 00

S u p e r v i s o r y U n i t 20 16 24

W o r l d - w i d e 20 08 04

A R B I T R A T I O N

C a n c e l l a t i o n as U L P 35

35

08

28

04

00

E f f e c t o n U L P 30 28 00

A R E A A D M I N I S T R A T O R ( A REA D I R E C T O R )

A u t h o r i t y for A p p r o v a l of C o n s e n t 

A g r e e m e n t 10 40 00

W i t h d r a w a l of A p p r o v a l of C o n s e n t 

A g r e e m e n t 10 40 00

1-54 6-30-76
A d v i s o r y O p i n i o n s 

A g e n t s as W i t n e s s e s 

A u t h o r i t y

D o c u m e n t s at H e a r i n g s 

J u r i s d i c t i o n 

Ro l e of 

ATTORNEYS

ASSISTANT SECRETARY

BALLOT 

BARG A I N I N G 

B A R G A I N I N G H I S T O R Y 

BARS T O P E T I T I O N 

A g r e e m e n t

05 08 00; 55 08 04 

05 12 04 

05 08 00 

05 08 00

05 16 00

05 12 04

C o n f l i c t of I n t e r e s t 10 32 00

A U T H O R I T Y O F

A g e n c y 05 08 00

A A 10 40 00

A/S 05 08 00

HO 15 04 00

A R D 10 40 00

AUTOMATIC R E N E W A L C L A U S E 10 24 12

- B -

BAD F A I T H N E G O T I A T I O N S 35 28 00

See: E L E C T I O N S 

See: N E G O T I A T I O N S 

20 04 04

10 24 12

6-30-76 155
C e r t i f i c a t i o n

E l e c t i o n

B I L L O F R I G H T S

C a m p a i g n i n g in L a b O r g O f f i c e r 

E l e c t i o n

C a n d i d a c y

C o m p l a i n t D i s m i s s a l C r i t e r i a

C o m p l a i n t P r o c e d u r e

C o n f l i c t of Interest, L a b O r g 

E m p l o y e e a n d M e m b e r

C o n v e n t i o n D e l e g a t e s

C o n v e n t i o n P a r t i c i p a t i o n

D e l e g a t e s , C o n v e n t i o n

E l e c t i o n , C e r t i f i c a t i o n of

E m p l o y e e - M e m b e r s of L a b O r g

E q u a l R i g h t s

E x h a u s t i o n o f R e m e d i e s

F ree S p e e c h an d A s s e m b l y

H e a r i n g R e q u i s i t e s

L a b O r g O f f E l e c t i o n

C a m p a i g n i n g

C a n d i d a c y

V i o l a t i o n s , A l l e g e d 

M e m b e r s h i p M e e t i n g s

BARS TO PETITION (cont.)

10 24 08

10 24 04

55 12 08

55 08 12; 55 12 04; 

55 12 08

55 08 08

55 08 00

55 12 04; 55 12 08 

55 0 8 12; 55 12 04 

55 12 04

55 08 1 2 ; 55 12 04 

55 08 12

55 12 04; 55 12 08 

55 12 04 

55 08 08 

55 12 08 

55 08 08

55 12 08

55 08 12; 55 12 04; 

55 12 08

55 08 12

55 12 04

156 6-30-76
M o o t n e s s

O f f i c e r , L a b O r g 

P r o c e d u r e 

B I N D I N G A G R E E M E N T S 

BURDEN O F P R O O F

I n t e r n a l S e c u r i t y E x c l u s i o n s 

O b j e c t i o n s to E l e c t i o n 

Re p U n i t D e t e r m i n a t i o n s 

U L P C a s e s

BILL OF RIGHTS (cont.)

55 08 08 

55 12 0 4 

55 08 08 

10 24 12

15 12 00 

25 08 08 

15 12 00

30 08 00; 30 12 24 

35 12 00

- C -

C A M P A I G N

L a b O r g O f f E l e c t i o n 

R e p C a s e

L i t e r a t u r e

M i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n 

W o r k H o u r s 

C A M P A I G N L I T E R A T U R E

CANDI D A C Y , L A B O R G O F F I C E R

" C A R V E - O U T”

C A T E G O R I E S O F E M P S 

CEASE A N D D E S I S T O R D E R S

55 12 08

25 08 12; 25 08 16; 

25 08 20; 35 08 08

25 08 20

25 08 16

25 08 12; 25 08 16; 

25 08 20; 35 08 08

55 08 12; 55 12 04; 

55 12 08

20 16 04

20 20 00

45 00 0 0 ; 50 00 00

6-30-76 157
CERTIFICATION

A m e n d m e n t of 10 04 20

B a r to P e t i t i o n 10 24 08

R e v o c a t i o n of 25 16 00

C H A L L E N G E S T O

B a l l o t 25 12 08

E l i g i b i l i t y 25 12 12

I n t e r v e n t i o n 10 12 00

S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 10 16 00

S t a t u s as L a b O r g 10 20 00

S t i p u l a t i o n s 20 12 04

V o t e r 20 20 0 0 ;

C H A N G E S , N A M E OF A C T I V I T Y O R 

R E P R E S E N T A T I V E

C H A R G E

C H E C K O F F R E V O C A T I O N BY A C T I V I T Y 

C I V I L S E R V I C E C O M M I S S I O N

C L A R I F I C A T I O N O F U N I T

C l a r i f i c a t i o n D e t e r m i n a t i o n s 

P r o c e d u r e 

C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S

COLLATERAL ISSUES

10 04 20

30 04 0 0 ; 30 08 00

35 24 0 0 ; 35 28 0 0 ;

45 04 00

EO Sec. 25(a) R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 10 32 00

F e d e r a l P e r s o n n e l W o r k 05 08 0 0 ;

G u i d a n c e 35 04 04

25 20 GO 

10 04 16

See: E M P C A T E G O R I E S A N D 

C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S

10 16 00

158 6-30-76
C O L L E C T I V E B A R G A I N I N G 

H i s t o r y

C O M M U N I T Y O F I N T E R E S T 

C O M P A N I O N C A S E S 

C O M P L A I N T

S t a n d a r d s o f C o n d u c t 

P r o c e d u r e

U L P

A m e n d m e n t

I n v e s t i g a t i o n

L i m i t e d to A l l e g a t i o n s

M o t i o n to D i s m i s s

P r e - C o m p l a i n t R e q u i r e m e n t s

R e q u i s i t e s

R u l i n g s o f A L J s

T i m e l i n e s s

V i o l a t i o n N o t S p e c i f i c a l l y Alle g e d 

C O M P L I A N C E W I T H D E C I S I O N A N D O R D E R 

C O M P O S I T I O N O F U N I T S

C O N C U R R E N T R E L A T E D C A S E S 

CON D U C T O F E L E C T I O N 

C O N F L I C T O F I N T E R E S T 

A t t o r n e y s

See also:

20 04 08; 

20 16 04

20 04 04

05 20 00;

See also;

PRACTICES;

C O N D U C T

55 00 00

55 08 00

30 00 00

30 08 00; 

30 16 00

30 08 00

30 12 00

30 '04 00

30 08 00

30 04 00

30 12 04

30 08 00

30 12 04

45 00 00;

20 08 0 0 ;

20 16 00

05 20 00;

25 08 08

10 32 00

N E G O T I A T I O N S 

20 04 12;

30 28 00

U N F A I R LA B O R 

S T A N D A R D S OF

30 12 00;

50 00 00 

20 12 00;

30 28 00

6-30-76 159
E m p l o y e e o f L a b O r g a nd M e m b e r 

M g t of L a b O r g a n d F 6d E m p l o y e e 

M g t O f f a n d L a b O r g R o l e 

C O N S E N T A G R E E M E N T

A A ' s A u t h o r i t y to A p p r o v e 

A A ' s W i t h d r a w a l o f A p p r o v a l 

R e f u s a l to S i g n 

C O N T I N U A N C E O F H E A R I N G 

C O N T R A C T B A R 

C O N V E N T I O N 

D e l e g a t e s 

P a r t i c i p a t i o n 

C O O P E R A T I O N O F P A R T I E S 

C O V E R A G E O F EO 

C R A F T S E V E R A N C E

C R O S S E X A M I N A T I O N , F A I L U R E T O A L L O W

C U R R E N T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S T A T U S OF 

P E T I T I O N E R

C U P E T I T I O N

CONFLICT OF INTEREST (cont.)

55 12 08

10 32 00

10 32 00

10 40 00

10 40 00

10 12 00

15 04 00

10 24 12

55 08 1 2 ; 55 12 04

55 12 04

15 20 00

05 08 00

20 16 04

15 12 00

10 28 00

10 04 16; 10 24 08

- D -

D E C E R T I F I C A T I O N

D E F I N I T I O N S

D e f u n c t n e s s

10 0 4 12

See also: E M P C A T E G O R I E S 

A N D C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S

05 0 4 00

160 6-30-76
L a b O r g

M a n a g e m e n t O f f i c i a l 

N o n - E m p l o y e e 

P r o f e s s i o n a l E m p l o y e e 

S u p e r v i s o r s 

Unit 

D E FUNCTNESS

DELEGATES, C O N V E N T I O N

D E T E R M I N A T I O N O F A P P R O P R I A T E U N I T 

DILATORY C O N D U C T 

D I S C L A I M E R O F I N T E R E S T 

DISMISSAL

D I S Q U A L I F I C A T I O N AS L A B O R G 

D I S T R I B U T I O N O F L I T E R A T U R E 

DOCUMENTS A T H E A R I N G , L M S A 

DR P E T I T I O N

DUES C H E C K O F F R E V O C A T I O N B Y A C T I V I T Y 

DUTY T O B A R G A I N

DEFINITIONS (cont.)

20 20 00 V i s t a Vol u n t e e r s 

05 04 00 

05 04 00 

05 04 00

05 04 00; 10 24 04;

10 24 12; 10 44 00

55 08 12; 55 12 04;

55 12 08

S e e : A P P R O P R I A T E UNITS 

35 08 04; 35 28 00 

10 04 12

See: R E P CASES; ULP; 

ST A N D A R D S OF C O N D U C T

10 20 00

See: C A M P A I G N LITE R A T U R E 

05 12 04 

10 04 12

35 24 00; 35 28 00;

45 16 00

See: N E G O T I A T I O N S

05 04 00

05 04 00

EFFEC T I V E D E A L I N G S 

E F F I C I E N C Y O F O P E R A T I O N S

- E -

20 04 08

20 04 12

6-30-76 161
E L E C T I O N B A R T O P E T I T I O N 

E L E C T I O N S

L a b O r g O f f i c e r s

See also: C H A L L E N G E S : A N D 

O B J E C T I O N S T O E L E C T I O N

10 24 04

C a m p a i g n i n g 55 12 08

C a n d i d a c y 55

55

08

12

12; 55 12 04; 

08

C o m p l a i n t P r o c e d u r e 55 08 12

R e p r e s e n t a t i o n

B a l l o t M a r k i n g s 25 12 08

C a m p a i g n i n g See: O B J E C T I O N S T O 

E L E C T I O N

C h a l l e n g e s See\ • C H A L L E N G E S

C r a f t S e v e r a n c e 20 16 04; 25 04 16

D e c e r t i f i c a t i o n 10 04 12

E l i g i b i l i t y 20 16 12 (See also: EMP 

C A T E G O R I E S A N D C L A S S I F I ­

C A T I O N S )

E x c l u s i o n f r o m B a l l o t 10 32 00

M a i l B a l l o t 25 08 08; 25 12 08

P o s i t i o n o n B a l l o t 10 12 00

P r o c e d u r e 25 04 00

P r o f E m p s 25 04 04

R o l e of O b s e r v e r s 25 04 12

R e f u s a l to S i g n C o n s e n t 

A g r e e m e n t 10 12 00

R e r u n 25 16 00

162

6-30-76
R e p r e s e n t a t i o n (cont.) 

R u n o f f

S e l f - D e t e r m i n a t i o n 

S e p a r a t e V o t i n g G r o u p s 

Se v e r a n c e 

Tally 

Tie Vote 

Voter Int e n t 

V o ting G r o u p s 

V oting P r o c e d u r e s 

ELIGIBILITY

e l e c t i o n s (cont.)

Seasonal Emps

EMPLOYEE C A T E G O R I E S A N D 

CLASSIFICATIONS

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e A i d e

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Asst.

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Ass t . ,

Admin. Serv. and R e s o u r c e s

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C l e r k in 

D i s t r i c t and B r a n c h Off.

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o o r d i n a t o r 

for N u r s i n g

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e I n t e r n

A d m i n i s t r a t i v e O f f i c e r

A n a l y s t s in the M a n a g e m e n t 

and R e s o u r c e s B r a n c h

A n a l y s t s in the R e v e n u e 

A c c o u n t i n g and P r o c e s s i n g B r a n c h

20 16 04; 25 04 16

25 08 08

25 16 00

25 12 00

25 04 00

25 04 04

See also: CHALLENGES; AND 

E MP C A T E G O R I E S AN D C L A S S I F I ­

C A T I O N S

20 16 12

25 08 08

25 08 08

25 04 00

, 6- 30-76

A

20 20 00 Conf Emps 

20 20 00 Conf Emps

20 20 00 Supv

20 20 00 Conf Emps

20 20 00 Supv

20 20 00 Conf Emps

20 20 00 Fed pers w o r k

20 20 00 M gt Off

20 20 00 Mg t Off

163
A u d i t o r - i n - C h a r g e 20 20 00 S u p v

B u d g e t A n a l y s t 20 20 00 M g t O f f

B u d g e t an d A c c o u n t i n g O f f 20 20 00 S u p v

C a n t e e n Emps 20 20 00

C e m e t e r y Emps 20 20 00

C h a p l a i n 20 20 00 P r o f Emps

C h e m i s t 20 20 00 M g t Off

C i vil E n g i n e e r 20 20 00 S u p v

C l e r k to A r e a S u p e r v i s o r 20 20 00 C onf Emps

C l e r k - S e c r e t a r i e s a s s i g n e d to

S e c t o r M g r and F i e l d Off. C h i e f s 20 20 00 C onf Emps

C l e r k - S t e n o g r a p h e r 20 20 00 C o n f Emps

C l e r k - T y p i s t 20 20 00 Con f Emps

C o m p u t e r S y s t e m s A n a l y s t s 20 20 00 M g t Off

C o n f i d e n t i a l Emps 20 20 00

C o n s t r u c t i o n A n a l y s t S u p v 20 20 00 S u p v

C o n s t r u c t i o n (Cost) A n a l y s t 20 20 00 M g t Off

C o n s t r u c t i o n C o s t E x a m i n e r 20 20 00 M g t Off

C o u r s e D e v e l o p e r - I n s t r u c t o r s 20 20 00 Fed pers work, Mg t Off

D e n t i s t 20 20 00 P rof Emps

D i s t r i c t C l e r k 20 20 00 Supv

E m p l o y m e n t D e v e l o p m e n t Spec 20 20 00 Fed pers w o r k

E n g i n e e r i n g Equip. Oper. F o r e m a n 20 20 00 S u p v

Fed pers w o r k 20 20 00

F iscal A n a l y s t 20 20 00 M g t O f f

F o r e s t e r 20 20 00 Supv

G e n e r a l S c h e d u l e 20 20 00

164 6-30-76

w
■# Guaras

H e a v y M o b i l e E q u i p m e n t M e c h 

I n d u s t r i a l E n g i n e e r 

L o a n S p e c i a l i s t (Realty) 

M a n a g e m e n t A n a l y s t 

M e d i c a l T e c h n o l o g i s t 

N o n - P r o f e s s i o n a l E m p s 

O p e r a t i o n s A n a l y s t s 

Perso n n e l Asst.

P e r s o n n e l M a n a g e m e n t S p e c

P h y s i c i a n

Police

P r o d u c t i o n C o n t r o l l e r 

Prof E m p s

P s y c h o l o g i s t

R e g i o n a l A n a l y s t

R e g i s t e r e d N u r s e

Seasonal E m p

S e c r e t a r i e s a s s i g n e d to 

Sector M g r an d F i e l d Off, C h i e f s

S e c r e t a r y

S e c r e t a r y to A L J in C h a r g e 

S e c r e t a r y T r a i n i n g Cntr, Admin. 

Sr M a n a g e m e n t A n a l y s t 

Sr P h y s i c i s t

20 20 00 M g t Off

20 20 00 Mg t Off

20 20 00 M g t Off

20 20 00 Prof Emps

20 20 00 Pro f Emps

20 20 00 Conf Emps, M g t Off

20 20 00 C onf Emps

20 20 00 Fed pers w o r k

20 20 00 Prof Emps

20 20 00 Guards

20 20 00 Supv

05 04 00; 20 04 04;

20 20 00; 25 04 04

20 20 00 Prof Emps

20 20 00 M g t Off

20 20 00 P rof Emps

20 20 00 T e m p Emp

20 20 00 Conf E m p s 

20 20 00 Con f Emps 

20 20 00 Conf Emps 

20 20 00 C onf Emps 

20 20 00 M g t Off 

20 20 00 M g t Off

20 20 00; 10 32 00

20 20 00 Supv

6-30-76 165
Sr R e g i o n a l A n a l y s t 20 20 GO M g t O f f

Sr R e g i o n a l A n a l y s t A u d i t 20 20 00 M g t O f f

Sr T e c h n i c a l Asst. 20 20 GO M g t O f f

S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g i s t 20 20 00 P r o f E m p s

S o c i a l W o r k e r 20 20 00 P r o f E m p s

S oil S c i e n t i s t 20 20 00 S u p v

S p e e c h P a t h o l o g i s t 20 20 00 P r o f Emps

S u p e r v i s o r s 20 20 00 S u p v

S u p e r v i s o r y A p p r a i s e r 20 20 00 S u p v

S u p v C l e r k - S t e n o g r a p h e r 20 20 GO Supv

S u p v F o r e s t T e c h n i c i a n 20 20 GO S u p v

T e m p E m p s 20 20 00

T h e a t r e S p e c i a l i s t 20 20 00 S u p v

V o c a t i o n a l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n 

S p e c i a l i s t 20 20 GO P r o f Emps

E M P L O Y E E O R G A N I Z A T I O N 

E M P L O Y E E R I G H T S

E M P L O Y E E S TATUS; E F F E C T O N U L P 

E Q U A L R I G H T S IN L AB O R G 

E R R O N E O U S A D V I C E BY L M S A AGE N T S 

E V I D E N C E

A d e q u a c y of R e c o r d 

A/S D o c u m e n t s at H e a r i n g s 

A/S Pers as W i t n e s s e s 

B u r d e n of Pr o o f 

D o c u m e n t s of A/S

See: L A B O R O R G A N I Z A T I O N 

35 08 GO 

30 24 GO 

55 12 G4 

IG 24 12

15 28 GO; 2G 04 16 

G5 12 04; 30 12 GO 

05 12 04

See: B U R D E N OF P R O O F 

05 12 04

166 6-30-76
e v i d e n c e (cont.)

E x c l u s i o n 25 08 08; 15 12 00

I m p r o p e r A c c e p t a n c e 30 12 00

L i m i t a t i o n s 15 12 00

M a t e r i a l i t y 15 12 00

P o s t - H e a r i n g S u b m i s s i o n 15 24 00

R e c o r d S u f f i c i e n c y 20 04 16; 15 28 00

R e j e c t i o n of E v i d e n c e 15 12 0 0 ; 15 24 00

R e l e v a n c e of E v i d e n c e 15 12 0 0 ; 15 24 00

R e o p e n i n g R e c o r d - 15 24 00

EXCLUSIONS F R O M A P P R O P R I A T E U N I T S 20 20 00

EXCLUSIONS F R O M E O C O V E R A G E 05 08 00

EXCLUSIVE R E C O G N I T I O N , W A I V E R O F 10 28 00

EXCLUSIVE R E C O G N I T I O N U N D E R E O 10988 05 08 00

EXCLUSIVE R E P R E S E N T A T I V E P E T I T I O N E R 10 28 00

EO 10988, T R A N S I T I O N A L P R O B L E M S 05 32 00

EO 11491, A N D AS A M E N D E D 

C o v e r a g e

Sec. K b ) 

2 (b)

E m p s P a r t i c i p a t i o n 

in M g t of L a b O r g

" E m p l o y e e "

2(c) " S u p e r v i s o r "

2(d) " G u a r d "

2(e) " L a b o r O r g a n i z a t i o n :

2 (e)(2) S t a t u s as L a b O r g

3(b ) ( 3 ) N a t i o n a l S e c u r i t y

05 08 00

10 32 00; 35 08 04

20 20 00 V i s t a Volunteers, 

C o m m i s s i o n e d OffCorps,

U.S. P u b l i c H e a l t h Service

30 24 00

20 04 16

05 04 00

40 20 00; 50 00 00 

05 08 00

6-30-7f> 167
A N D AS A M E N D E D (cont.)

3 (b)(4) I n t e r n a l A g e n c y S e c u r i t y 05 08 0 0 ; 15 12 00

3(d) U n i o n s of La b R e l Pers. 10 32 00

10 (b) C r i t e r i a for A p p r o p r i a t e 

U n i t

20 04 00 to 20 20 00

10 ( b ) (1 ) " M a n a g e m e n t O f f i c i a l " , 

" S u p e r v i s o r " 20 20 00

1 0 ( b ) (2 ) Fed Pers W o r k 20 20 0 0 ; 05 08 00

1 0(b)(3) G u a r d s 10

20

32

16

0 0 ;

04

20 20 0 0 ;

10(b)(4) Pro f Emps 20

25

04

04

04;

04;

20

25

20

12

0 0 ;

08

1 0 (c) N o n - G u a r d U n i o n 10 32 0 0 ; 20 16 04

1 1 (a) N e g o t i a b i l i t y 35 28 00

1 1 (b) N e g o t i a b i l i t y 35 28 00

1 1(c)(4) N e g o t i a b i l i t y 35 28 00

1 1 (d) N e g o t i a b i l i t y 05 08 0 0 ; 35 28 08

13(a) G r i e v a n c e P r o c e d u r e s 60 08 00

13(b) A r b i t r a t i o n 60 12 00

13(d) Q u e s t i o n o n G r i e v a b i l i t y 

or A r b i t r a b i l i t y 60 16 00

1 9(a)(1) I n t e r f e r e n c e by A g e n c y 35 04 04; 35 08 00

1 9(a)(2) D i s c r i m i n a t i o n by A g e n c y 35 12 00

1 9(a)(3) I m p r o p e r A s s i s t a n c e 35 16 00

1 9(a)(4) D i s c r i m i n a t i o n for 

C o m p l a i n t , T e s t i m o n y 35 20 00

19(a)(5) R e f u s a l to G r a n t 

R e c o g n i t i o n 35 24 00

168 6-30-76
Sec. 19(a ) ( 6 ) A g e n c y R e f u s a l to Confer, 

C o n s u l t , N e g o t i a t e

1 9 ( b ) ( 1 ) I n t e r f e r e n c e by L a b O r g

1 9 ( b ) ( 4 ) S t r i k e

1 9 ( b ) ( 6 ) U n i o n R e f u s a l to Confer, 

C o n s u l t , N e g o t i a t e

19(d) G r i e v a n c e or A p p e a l s

P r o c e d u r e

20 Us e of O f f i c i a l T i m e

24(2) U n i t s o f M a n a g e m e n t O f f i ­

c i a l s o r S u p e r v i s o r s

25(a) C S C R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s

E X H A U S T I O N O F R E M E D I E S , S T A N D A R D S OF 

C O N D U C T

EO 11491, AND AS AMENDED (cont.)

E X T E N T O F O R G A N I Z A T I O N

F AILURE T O C O O P E R A T E 

F A I L U R E T O S E R V E D O C U M E N T S 

FED P ERS W O R K 

F I X E D T E R M A G R E E M E N T 

F O R M A L H E A R I N G S 

F R A G M E N T A T I O N O F U N I T 

FREE S P E E C H

R e p r e s e n t a t i o n E l e c t i o n 

L a b O r g M e m b e r s

G O O D F A I T H

- F -

- G -

4G 28 GG

35 32 GG

30 G4 GG; 35 28 GG

10 32 GG 

10 32 GG

55 G 8 08 

2G G4 04

15 20 GG; 30 12 28

05 28 00

05 08 00

10 24 12

S e e : H E A R I N G S

20 04 08; 2G 04 12

25 08 16 

55 12 08

35 28 GO

40 08 GO

4G 20 GG

35 28 GO

6-3G-76 169
G R I E V A B I L I T Y A N D A R B I T R A B I L I T Y

- H -

G e n e r a l 

G R I E V A N C E S

E f f e c t o n U L P 

U n i l a t e r a l A d j u s t m e n t 

G U A R D S

M g t of N o n - G u a r d L a b O r g

Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of L a b O r g 

to R e p r e s e n t

H A N D B I L L I N G

H E A D OF A G E N C Y A U T H O R I T Y T O 

E X C L U D E E M P S F R O M EO

HE (ALJ) R E P O R T A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 

A N D E X C E P T I O N S

C r e d i b i l i t y R e s o l u t i o n s

O b j e c t i o n s

U L P

H E A R I N G S

A c c e p t a n c e into E v i d e n c e

A d e q u a c y of R e c o r d

A d m i s s i b i l i t y of E v i d e n c e

A /S D o c u m e n t s at H e a r i n g s

A/ S Pers as W i t n e s s e s

A u t h o r i t y of HO

B ar to P e t i t i o n

B u r d e n o f P r o o f

35 08 04; 35 28 00

20 0 4 16; 20 16 04;

20 20 00; 10 32 00

10 32 00 

10 32 00

S e e : C A M P A I G N L I T E R A T U R E 

05 08 00

64 04 00

30 28 00

30 16 00 

25 08 08 

30 16 00

30 16 00

15 28 00; 20 0 4 16

05 12 08

05 12 04

05 12 04

15 0 4 00

10 24 00

See: B U R D E N OF P R O O F

170 6-30-76
HEARINGS (cont.)

C o l l a t e r a l Issues 10 16 00

C o n t i n u a n c e o f H e a r i n g 15 04 00

C o o p e r a t i o n of P a r t i e s 15 20 00

C r o s s E x a m i n a t i o n , F a i l u r e

to A l l o w 15 12 00

D o c u m e n t s 15 12 00

D o c u m e n t s , L M S A 15 12 04

E v i d e n c e S e e : E V I DENCE

E x c l u s i o n of T e s t i m o n y 25 08 08

F a i l u r e to C o o p e r a t e 15 20 0 0 ; 30 12 28

HE (ALJ) R e p o r t , N o E x c e p t i o n s 30 16 00

I n a d e q u a t e R e c o r d 15 28 0 0 ; 20 04 16

L o c a t i o n 15 08 04

M a t e r i a l i t y 15 12 00

M o t i o n s 15 08 00

N o n - C o o p e r a t i o n of P a r t i e s 15 20 0 0 ; 30 12 28

O f f i c i a l T i m e to A t t e n d 05 08 0 0 ; 15 20 0 0 ;

35 08 04; 35 28 00

P o s t - H e a r i n g S u b m i s s i o n s 15 24 00

P o s t p o n e m e n t M o t i o n 15 08 04

R e c o r d S u f f i c i e n c y 15 24 0 0 ; 20 04 16

R e f u s a l to F u r n i s h I n f o r m a t i o n to HO 15 20 00

R e j e c t i o n o f E v i d e n c e 15 12 00

R e l e v a n c e o f E v i d e n c e 15 12 00

R e m a n d 15 28 00

R e o p e n i n g of R e c o r d 15 24 00

6-30-76 171
R e q u e s t for L M S A Per s as W i t n e s s e s

R o l e of H O

R u l i n g s o f A L J s

S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t C h a l l e n g e

S t i p u l a t e d R e c o r d

S t i p u l a t i o n s

S u b m i s s i o n s a f t e r H e a r i n g

S u p p l e m e n t a l B r i e f s

T e s t i m o n y E x c l u s i o n

T i m e A l l o w e d for F i l i n g 

S u p p l e m e n t a l Bri e f s

T r a n s c r i p t C o r r e c t i o n

W i t n e s s e s

L M S A S t a f f

O f f i c i a l T i m e

W r i t t e n O p e n i n g S t a t e m e n t 

H I S T O R Y O F B A R G A I N I N G

HEARINGS (cont.)

Request for LMSA Documents

I N A D E Q U A T E S H O W I N G O F I N T E R E S T 

I N A P P R O P R I A T E U N I T 

I N C U M B E N T L A B O R G P E T I T I O N E R 

I N S T R U C T O R S , S T A T U S A N D R I G H T S 

I N S U F F I C I E N T R E C O R D

172

05 12 04

05 12 04

15 04 00

30 12 0 4

10 16 00

30 20 00

20 0 4 16; 15 24 00

15 24 00

15 24 00

25 08 08

15 24 00

15 24 00

15 12 00

05 12 04

05 08 0 0 ; 15 20 0 0 ;

35 08 04; 35 28 00

15 12 00

10 24 12; 20 04 08

See: S H O W I N G OF INT]

20 04 00 to 20 201 00

10 28 00

30 24 00

15 28 0 0 ; 20 04 16

6-30 -76
INSULATED PERIOD 10 24 12

INSURANCE A S C A M P A I G N B E N E F I T 

INTEREST, S H O W I N G OF 

I N T E R FERENCE W I T H E M P S R I G H T S 

INTERNAL S E C U R I T Y O F A G E N C Y 

INTERVENOR 

INTERVENTION

C h a l l e n g e to

S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 

S t a t u s as L a b O r g 

D i s m i s s a l 

I n c u m b e n t L a b O r g 

I n t e r v e n o r

N o t i f i c a t i o n to P o t e n t i a l 

I n t e r v e n o r s

O p p o r t u n i t y to W i t h d r a w 

P o s t - D e c i s i o n a l I n t e r v e n t i o n 

S h o w i n g o f I n t e r e s t 

T i m e l i n e s s 

INVESTIGATION, U L P C O M P L A I N T S 

JOB C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S

J U R I S D I C T I O N O F A / S

25 08 20; 25 08 24 

10 16 0 0 ; 20 16 08 

35 08 00; 25 08 00 

05 08 00; 15 12 00 

See; INTERV E N T I O N

10 16 00

10 20 00

10 12 00

10 12 00

10 12 0 0 ; 20 24 08;

20 24 12

10 08 00

20 24 12 

20 24 04

10 16 00; 20 24 08 

10 12 00

30 08 00

See; EMP CATEGO R I E S A N D 

C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S

55 08 04; 05 08 00

6-30-76 173
- L -

L M S A

A g e n t s

As W i t n e s s e s 

E r r o n e o u s A d v i c e 

D o c u m e n t s at H e a r i n g 

L A B O R O R G A N I Z A T I O N 

B i l l o f R i g h t s 

C h a l l e n g e to S t a t u s 

D e f i n i t i o n

I n c u m b e n t L a b O r g P e t i t i o n e r 

I n t e r v e n o r

L e g i s l a t i v e - E x e c u t i v e B r a n c h 

R e p r e s e n t a t i o n

M a n a g e m e n t of

M e e t i n g s

O f f i c e r E l e c t i o n s

P a i d E m p l o y e e - M e m b e r s

Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s to R e p r e s e n t 

S p e c i f i e d C a t e g o r i e s o f E m p s

R e m e d i a l O r d e r s A g a i n s t

Sec. 19(b)(1)

19(b)(4)

19(b)(6)

S t a n d a r d s of C o n d u c t

05 12 04 

10 24 12 

05 12 04

See; B I L L OF R I G H T S 

10 20 00

05 0 4 00 

10 28 00

See: I N T E R V E N T I O N

05 08 00

10 32 00

55 12 04

See: E L E C T I O N S

55 12 04; 55 12 08

10 32 00

40 08 00 .

40 20 00 

40 28 00

05 08 00; 05 20 OOj 

10 20 00; 55 00 00

174 6-30-76
;>■

iii - "

LABOR O R G A N I Z A T I O N (cont.) 

S tatus as 

ULP

LEGISLATIVE - E X E C U T I V E B R A N C H 

LAB ORG

LITERATURE

10 20 00

35 00 00; 40 00 00 

05 08 00

See: C A M P A I G N L I TERATURE

- M -

MGT OFF

C on f l i c t o f I n t e r e s t 

MARKINGS ON B A L L O T 

MEMBERSHIP IN A L A B ORG, D E N I A L OF 

MEMBERSHIP PINS, B U T T O N S 

MERGER AT A C T I V I T Y

M I S R EPRESENTATION IN C A M P A I G N

MOONLIGHTERS

MOOTNESS

S tandards of C o n d u c t 

ULP 

MOTIONS

A m e n d m e n t o f P e t i t i o n 

D i s m i s s a l of P e t i t i o n

For W i t n e s s e s a n d / o r P r o d u c t i o n 

of D o c u m e n t s

P o s t - H e a r i n g S u b m i s s i o n s

05 04 00 

10 32 00 

25 12 08 

40 32 00 

35 08 04

10 04 08; 10 04 20;

20 16 08

25 08 20

20 20 00 Off - D u t y Mil Emps 

55 08 08

30 28 00; 35 20 00

15 08 08 

15 12 00

15 12 00 

15 24 00

6-30-76 175
MOTIONS (cont.)

P o s t p o n e m e n t o f H e a r i n g 15 08 0 4

R e o p e n i n g o f R e c o r d 15 24 00

R e p C a s e s , G e n e r a l 15 08 04

U L P 30 12 00

- N -

N A T I O N A L G U A R D , E O C O V E R A G E

N L R B D E C I S I O N S , R O L E O F

N A T I O N A L S E C U R I T Y E M P S

N E G O T I A B I L I T Y

N E G O T I A T I O N S

N E W S H O W I N G O F IN T E R E S T , 

P O S T - D E C I S I O N A L

9 0 - 6 0 D A Y " O P E N " P E R I O D

N O - D I S T R I B U T I O N R U L E

N O - S O L I C I T A T I O N R U L E

N O N - A C C E S S T O W O R K A R E A S BY N O N - E M P S

N O N - C O O P E R A T I O N O F P A R T I E S

N O N W O R K A R E A C A M P A I G N I N G

N O N W O R K T I M E C A M P A I G N I N G

N O T I C E S

C o m p l i a n c e w i t h U L P D e c i s i o n and

05 08 00

05 24 00

05 08 00

35 28 00

35 2 8 00

20 24 08

10 24 12

35 08 08

35 08 12

25 08 16; 35 08 0 4

15 20 0 0 ; 30 12 28

35 08 08; 35 08 12

35 08 08; 35 08 12

O r d e r 45 00 00

M a i l i n g o f U L P N o t i c e 50 00 00

N o t i c e o f P e t i t i o n 10 08 00

176 6-30-76
notices (cont.)

Post-Hearing Notice of Unit 

Determinat ion

ULP

n o t i f i c a t i o n o f c o m p l i a n c e

n o t i f i c a t i o n t o p o t e n t i a l i n t e r v e n o r s

nurses

- 0 -

o b j e c t i o n s t o r e p e l e c t i o n

Access to Employees

Activity Facilities

Activity Interference

Agency Rules on Campaigning

Anit-Union Literature

Burden of Proof

Campaign Misrepresentation

Challenges, Distinguished from

Conduct of Election

Electioneering

Free Speech

HE (ALJ) Report

Impact on Election

Lack of Specificity

Mail Facilities of Activity

20 24 04

45 00 0 0 ; 50 00 00

10 08 00

45 00 0 0 ; 50 00 00

20 16 04

25 08 

L A B O R

00 (see also 

PRACTICES)

25 08 16

25 08 16

25 08 16; 25 08 28

25 08 16

35 08 04; 35 08 08

25 08 08

25 08 20

25 12 12

25 08 28

20 16 04

25 08 16

25 08 08; 25 08 16

25

25

08

08

12

08;

to 25 08 

25 08 24

25 08 08

20 12 00

6-30-76 177
N o n - E m p l o y e e A c c e s s to A c t i v i t y

OBJECTIONS TO REP ELECTION (cont.)

P r e m i s e s 25 08 16

N o n - I n t e r v e n i n g U n i o n 25 08 16

P r o c e d u r e 25 08 08

P r o m i s e s o f B e n e f i t 25 08 24

R e p o r t o n O b j e c t i o n s , HE (ALJ) 25 08 08; 25 08 16

R u n o f f E l e c t i o n 25 08 08

S e r v i c e 05 28 00

Sid e A g r e e m e n t s 25 08 08

T i m e l i n e s s 25 08 08

T i m i n g of O b j e c t i o n a b l e C o n d u c t 

O B L I G A T I O N S OF P A R T I E S

25 08 12

A v a i l a b i l i t y o f W i t n e s s e s 15 20 0 0 ; 30 08 00;

35 08 04; 35 12 00

B a r g a i n i n g See: N E G O T I A T I O N S

B u r d e n of P r o o f S e e : B U R D E N OF P R O O F

C o o p e r a t i o n in P r o c e e d i n g s 15 20 00

F u r n i s h i n g I n f o r m a t i o n 30 08 00

O f f i c i a l T i m e for W i t n e s s e s 15

35

20

12

0 0 ;

00

35 08 04;

O C C U P A T I O N A L H E A L T H N U R S E 25 0 4 04; 25 12 08

O F F - D U T Y H O U R S N E G O T I A T I O N S 35 28 00

O F F - D U T Y M I L EMPS 20 04 16; 20 20 00

O F F I C I A L T I M E F O R W I T N E S S E S 05 36 0 0 ; 15 20 00;

35 08 04; 35 12 00

" O P E N P E R I O D " 

178

10 24 12

6 - 3 0 - 7 6
"OPEN S E A S O N”

O P P O R T U N I T Y T O W I T H D R A W P E T I T I O N

10 24 12

20 16 12

-

PERS W ORK, F E D

PETITIONER, S T A T U S OF

PETITIONS

AC: A m e n d m e n t , R e c o g n i t i o n 

or C e r t i f i c a t i o n

A g e n c y D o u b t of R e p r e s e n t a t i v e ' s 

Status (RA)

A m e n d m e n t

C l a r i f i c a t i o n o f U n i t (CU) 

D e c e r t i f i c a t i o n (DR)

D i s m i s s a l

DR: D e c e r t i f i c a t i o n

O p p o r t u n i t y to W i t h d r a w

P e t i t i o n e r w i t h E x c l u s i v e 

R e c o g n i t i o n

RA: A g e n c y D o u b t o f R e p r e ­

s e n t a tive's S t a t u s

Service

POSITION O N B A L L O T

POST-DECISIONAL

I n t e r v e n t i o n

N o t i c e s

05 08 00 

10 28 00

10 04 20

10 04 08 

15 08 08 

10 04 16 

10 04 12

15 20 00; 20 16 08;

10 16 0 0 ; 10 24 00 to 

10 36 00

10 04 12

20 24 12

10 28 00

10 04 08 

05 28 00 

10 12 00

20 24 04

20 24 04

6-30-76 179
S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 

W i t h d r a w a l 

P O S T - H E A R I N G 

R e p C a s e s 

U L P 

P O S T I N G

P R E - C O M P L A I N T R E Q U I R E M E N T S 

S t a n d a r d s of C o n d u c t 

U L P

P R E M A T U R E E X T E N S I O N S O F A G R E E M E N T

P R E R E Q U I S I T E S

P R I N C I P A L - A G E N T

P R I V A T E S E C T O R LAW, R O L E OF

P R O C E D U R E

POST-DECISIONAL (conto)

P R O F EMPS

P R O M I S E S OF B E N E F I T

P R O P A G A N D A

Q U A L I F I C A T I O N S OF LA B O R G T O 

R E P R E S E N T S P E C I F I E D C A T E G O R I E S 

OF E M P S

Q U E S T I O N S C O N C E R N I N G B A L L O T

RA PETITION

- R -

20 24 08 

20 24 12 

15 24 00 

15 24 00 

30 16 00 

See: N O T I C E S

55 08 08

30 0 4 00; 30 08 00 

10 24 12

See; R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R 

35 08 08 

05 24 00

See S p e c i f i c C a p t i o n s S u c h 

As: E L E C T I O N S ; O B J E C T I O N S ; 

R E P CASES; ULP; S T A N D A R D S 

OF C O N D U C T

05 04 00; 25 0 4 04

25 08 24

25 08 12 to 25 08 20;

35 08 08; 25 08 24

10 32 00 

25 12 08

10 04 08

180 6-30-76
r e c o r d H E A R I N G S

r e f u s a l t o

B a r g a i n 35 28 00

C o o p e r a t e 15 20 0 0 ;

Sign C o n s e n t A g r e e m e n t 10 12 00

r e g u l a t i o n s

A g e n c y Regulat: 

B i n d i n g o n A / S

ions N o t

20 04 16

REGULATIONS O F A / S

Seco 2 02.2 (f) S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 10 16 00

202 .2 (g) S t a t u s o f L a b O r g 10 20 00

202.3(b) C e r t i f i c a t i o n B a r 10 24 08

202.3(c) T i m e l i n e s s of 

P e t i t i o n 10 24 00

202.3(d) I n s u l a t e d P e r i o d 

F o l l o w i n g W i t h d r a w a l , 

D i s m i s s a l 10 24 12

2 02.3(e) P r e m a t u r e C o n t r a c t 

E x t e n s i o n 10 24 12

202.4(b) N o t i c e o f P e t i t i o n 10 08 00

202.4(f),

(g) R e s p o n s e to P e t i t i o n 15 08 04

202,5 I n t e r v e n t i o n 20 24 04

202.6 (d) R e q u e s t for R e v i e w 

S e r v i c e 05 28 00

202.7(c) P o s i t i o n o n B a l l o t 10 12 00

202.12(k) C o n t i n u a n c e o f H e a r i n g 15 04 00

2 0 2 .2 0 (a) Ob j e c t i o n s : F i l i n g 25 08 08

S e r v i c e 05 28 00

6-30-76 181
REGULATIONS OF A/S (cont.)

Sec. 2 0 2 . 2 0 ( d ) 

203.2 

2 0 3 . 3 ( e ) 

2 0 3 . 2 6

O b j e c t i o n s ; B u r d e n 

of P r o o f

R e q u i r e m e n t s for 

C h a r g e

R e p o r t o f I n v e s t i ­

g a t i o n

C o m p l i a n c e w i t h A/S 

O r d e r

2 0 4 . 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) E q u a l R i g h t s

2 0 4 o 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) F r e e S p e e c h and 

A s s e m b l y

2 0 4 . 2 ( a ) ( 5 ) D i s c i p l i n a r y A c t i o n

2 0 4 . 2 9

2 0 4 . 5 8

2 0 4 . 6 3

E l e c t i o n o f O f f i c e r s

D i s m i s s a l of 

S t a n d a r d s C o m p l a i n t

C o m p l a i n t s , E l e c t i o n 

of O f f i c e r s

205.5(a) S t i p u l a t e d R e c o r d

R E J E C T I O N O F E V I D E N C E 

R E L A T E D C ASES, C O N C U R R E N T 

R E L E V A N C E O F E V I D E N C E 

R E M A N D 

R E M E D Y : U L P

A g a i n s t A g e n c i e s 

A g a i n s t L a b O r g 

R E O R G A N I Z A T I O N O F A C T I V I T Y

R E P O R T O F I N V E S T I G A T I O N , U L P

30 0 4 00; 30 28 00

30 08 00

45 0 4 00 

55 12 04

55 12 08 

55 08 08 

55 08 12

55 08 08

55 08 12

30 20 00 

15 12 00 

05 20 00 

15 12 00 

15 28 00

45 00 00; 45 0 4 00 

45 08 00

10 04 08; 10 0 4 20; 

20 16 28

30 08 00

25 08 08

182 6-30-76
P r ese n ta tio n c a s e s

AC P e t i t i o n 

A c c r e t i o n

Activity R e f u s a l to R e s p o n d to 

P etition

Agency P e t i t i o n (RA)

Agency R e g u l a t i o n s N o t B i n d i n g 

on A/S

Agreement B a r 

Amendment

C e r t i f i c a t i o n 

P e t i t i o n 

R e c o g n i t i o n 

Appropriate U n i t 

AA.*s A c t i o n 

Burden of P r o o f 

Certifi c a t i o n 

A m e n d m e n t 

Bar 

Challenges

Clari f i c a t i o n of U n i t (CU) 

Community o f I n t e r e s t 

Concurrent R e l a t e d C a s e s 

CU P e t i t i o n

10 00 00 to 25 00 00

See also S pecific Top i c s 

S u c h A s : A P P R O P R I A T E 

UNIT; ELECTIONS; HEARINGS; 

O B J E C T I O N S T O ELECTIONS; 

Etc.

10 04 20 

20 16 08

15 16 00 

10 04 08

20 04 16 

10 24 12

10 08 20

15 08 08 

10 0 4 20

See: A P P R O P R I A T E UNIT.

10 40 00

15 12 00

25 16 00

10 0 4 20

10 24 08

See: C H A L L E N G E S 

25 20 00; 10 04 16 

20 0 4 04 

0 5 20 00 

10 0 4 16

6-30-76 183
R E P R E S E N T A T I O N C A S E S (cont.) 

C u r r e n t R e p r e s e n t a t i v e

S t a t u s o f P e t i t i o n e r 10 28 00

D e c e r t i f i c a t i o n 10 0 4 12

D R P e t i t i o n 10 04 12

E f f e c t i v e D e a l i n g s 20 04 08

E f f i c i e n c y of O p e r a t i o n s 20 04 12

E l e c t i o n B a r to P e t i t i o n 10 24 04

E l i g i b i l i t y 20 16 12 ; 20 20

25 12 00

E v i d e n c e 15 12 00

H e a r i n g O f f i c e r R o l e 15 04 00

I n t e r v e n t i o n 20 24 04; 20 24

10 12 00

L a b O r g S t a t u s 10 20 00

M o t i o n s 15 08 00

N o t i c e of

P e t i t i o n 20 24 04; 10 08

U n i t D e t e r m i n a t i o n 20 24 04

O b j e c t i o n s See: O B J E C T I O N S

O b l i g a t i o n s o f P a r t i e s 15 20 00

O p p o r t u n i t y to W i t h d r a w 20 24 12

P e t i t i o n s , I n c o n s i s t e n t 10 4 4 00

P e t i t i o n s , T y p e s 10 0 4 00

P o l i c y o n C o n s e n t A g r e e m e n t s 10 40 0 0 ; 15 28

P o s t - H e a r i n g S u b m i s s i o n s 15 24 00

184 6-30-76
P o s t i n g , N o t i c e of 

P e t i t i o n

U n i t D e t e r m i n a t i o n

P r o c e d u r e

E l e c t i o n s

H e a r i n g s

P o s t - E l e c t i o n

P r e l i m i n a r y S t a g e s

Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s to R e p r e s e n t 

S p e c i f i e d C a t e g o r i e s o f E m p l o y e e s

R A P e t i t i o n

R e m a n d

R e q u e s t for R e v i e w R i g h t s 

R e s i d u a l E m p l o y e e s 

S e l f - D e t e r m i n a t i o n 

S ervice o f D o c u m e n t s 

S e v e r a n c e

Sh o w i n g of I n t e r e s t

Stand a r d s o f C o n d u c t

S t i p u l a t i o n s of P a r t i e s N o t 

Bi n d i n g o n A / S

T i m e l i n e s s

U L P A l l e g a t i o n s

Uni t D e t e r m i n a t i o n s

V o t i n g P r o c e d u r e s

IEPRESENTATION c a s e s (cont.)

10 08 00; 20 24 04

20 24 04

25 00 00

15 00 00

25 00 00

10 00 00

10 32 00

10 04 08

15 28 00

10 36 00

20 16 16

20 16 2 0 ;

05 28 00

20 16 04

10 16 0 0 ;

05 20 00

20 04 16

10 24 00

15 16 00

20 00 00

25 04 00

6-30-76 185
R E Q U E S T F O R

A p p e a r a n c e o f W i t n e s s e s 

D o c u m e n t s 

L M S A D o c u m e n t s 

L M S A P e r s as W i t n e s s e s 

W i t n e s s e s 

R E Q U E S T F O R R E V I E W 

N e w E v i d e n c e 

O b j e c t i o n s to E l e c t i o n 

R e f u s a l to D i s m i s s P e t i t i o n 

S e r v i c e of 

S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 

S t a t u s as L a b O r g 

R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R 

C h a r g e 

C o m p l a i n t 

C o n s e n t A g r e e m e n t 

I n t e r v e n t i o n 

P e t i t i o n

U n i t D e t e r m i n a t i o n H e a r i n g s 

R E R U N E L E C T I O N 

R E S I D U A L U N I T 

R E S P O N S E T O P E T I T I O N 

R E V O C A T I O N O F C E R T I F I C A T I O N

15 20 GO; 35 08 04 

15 12 00 

05 12 04 

05 12 04 

05 12 00

30 08 00 

25 08 08 

10 36 00 

05 28 00 

10 16 00

10 20 00

30 04 00 

30 04 00 

10 40 00 

10 12 00

10 24 00; 10 40 00; 

15 08 08; 10 08 00

10 40 00

25 16 00

20 16 16

15 08 04

25 16 00

186 6-30-76
I r "

ROLE OF

A gency D i r e c t i v e s , U L P

Agency Head: E x c l u s i o n of Emps, 

EO C o v e r a g e

A/S

CSC G u i d a n c e 

HO

NLRB D e c i s i o n s 

RUNOFF E L E C T I O N

35 04 04

05 08 00 

05 08 00 

35 04 04 

15 04 00 

05 24 00 

25 08 08

- S -

SECTIONS

EO

Regu l a t i o n s 

SECURITY EMPS

SELF-DETERMINATION E L E C T I O N 

Unit D e t e r m i n a t i o n 

V oting P r o c e d u r e 

SEPARATE V O T I N G 

SERVICE OF D O C U M E N T S 

SEVERANCE 

SHAM S T I P U L A T I O N

SHOWING OF I N T E R E S T 

A d e q u a c y

A g e n c y Mgt, I n v o l v e m e n t In

See: EXECU T I V E ORDER 

11491, A N D AS A M E NDED

See; R E G U L ATIONS OF A / S

05 08 00

20 16 20

25 04 08 

25 04 00

05 28 00; 25 08 08 

20 16 04

20 04 16; 25 12 04;

25 16 00

10 16 00; 20 24 08 

10 16 00

6-30-76 187
S H O W I N G O F I N T E R E S T (cont.)

A g r e e m e n t Bar, U n i l a t e r a l W a i v e r of 10 16 00

C h a l l e n g e at H e a r i n g 10 16 00

C h a l l e n g e to I n t e r v e n o r 10 16 0 0 ; 20 24 08

C h a l l e n g e to P e t i t i o n e r 10 16 00

I n a d e q u a t e for L a r g e r U n i t

F o u n d A p p r o p r i a t e 20 24 08

P o s t - D e c i s i o n a l 20 24 08

R e q u e s t for R e v i e w 10 16 00

S e a s o n a l I n d u s t r i e s 10 16 0 0 ; 20 24 08

V a l i d i t y 10 16 00

S I C K - O U T 40 20 0 0 ; 50 00 00

S I D E A G R E E M E N T S

E l e c t i o n s 25 08 08

N e g o t i a t i o n s 35 28 00

S I N G L E E M P L O Y E E U N I T 05 04 00

S O L I C I T A T I O N O F M E M B E R S 35 08 04; 35 08 12

S T A N D A R D S O F C O N D U C T 05 08 0 0 ; 05 20 00

10 20 0 0 ; 55 00 00

B i l l of R i g h t s 

E l e c t i o n s

E q u a l R i g h t s

F r e e S p e e c h an d A s s e m b l y 

J u r i s d i c t i o n o f A / S

See A l s o S p e c i f i c C a p t i o n s 

Such As: B I L L O F R I G HTS; 

LA B O R G E L E C T I O N S ; F R E E 

S P E E C H

55 08 08; 55 12 00

55 08 12; See Also; 

E L E C T I O N S ; L A B O R G O F F I C E R S

55 12 04

55 12 08

55 08 04

188 6-30-76
S T A N D A R D S OF C O N D U C T (cont.) 

P r o c e d u r e 

Rep C a s e s 

S T A T E M E N T O F S E R V I C E O F D O C U M E N T S 

STATUS A S L A B O R G 

S T I P U L A T E D R E C O R D 

S T I P U L A T I O N S

Of P a r t i e s N o t B i n d i n g o n A / S

R e l a t e d to C h a l l e n g e s

S h a m

STRIKE

S U B M I S S I O N S A F T E R H E A R I N G 

S U P E R V I S O R S 

SUP E R V I S O R S ' U N I T 

S U P P L E M E N T A L B R I E F S

05 20 0 0 ; 10 20 00 

05 28 00 

10 20 00

30 20 00

30 20 00; 15 24 00 

20 04 16 

25 12 04

20 04 16; 25 12 04; 

25 16 00

40 20 00

15 24 00

05 04 00

10 32 00

15 24 00

55 08 00

- T -

T A L L Y O F B A L L O T S

T E L E T Y P I S T S

t e m p o r a r y E M P S

T E R M I N A L D A T E O F A G R E E M E N T

T E S T I M O N Y

TI E V O T E E L E C T I O N

T I M E L I N E S S

A l l e g a t i o n o f U L P C o m p l a i n t 

D e f i c i e n c y

25 08 08 

20 20 00 

20 04 16 

10 24 12 

S e e : EVIDENCE 

25 16 00

30 08 00

6-30-76 189
T I M E L I N E S S (cont.) 

C o m p l a i n t

S t a n d a r d s o f C o n d u c t 55 08 08

U L P 30 08 00

C o r r e c t i o n o f T r a n s c r i p t 15 24 00

I n t e r v e n t i o n 20 24 04; 10 12 00

M o t i o n to D i s m i s s U L P C o m p l a i n t 30 04 0 0 ; 30 08 00

N e w E v i d e n c e in R e q u e s t for R e v i e w 30 08 00

O b j e c t i o n s to R e p E l e c t i o n 25 08 08

P e t i t i o n 10 24 00

S h o w i n g of I n t e r e s t 20 24 08; 10 12 00

W i t h d r a w a l 20 24 12

T R A D E U N I O N See: L A B O R G

T R A N S C R I P T See: H E A R I N G

T R A N S I T I O N A L P R O B L E M S 05 32 00

- U -

U N D E R M I N I N G R E P R E S E N T A T I V E 35 28 00

U N F A I R L A B O R P R A C T I C E S

A g e n c y

A c c e s s to A g e n c y F a c i l i t i e s 

by N o n - I n t e r v e n o r

D i r e c t i v e s

U L P

30 00 00 to 45 00 00;

See A l s o S p e c i f i c T o p i c s 

S u c h As; C O M P L A I N T , ULP; 

E V I D E N C E ; HE A R I N G S ; 

O B J E C T I O N S T O E L E C T I O N S

35 08 12 

35 04 04 

35 00 00

190 6-30-76
U N F A I R L A B O R P R A C T I C E S (cont.) 

A g r e e m e n t

E x t e n s i o n 

N e g o t i a t i o n 

R e f u s a l to S i g n 

A m e n d m e n t o f C o m p l a i n t 

A n t i - U n i o n L i t e r a t u r e 

A p p r o p r i a t e U n i t 

A r b i t r a t i o n 

A w a r d

C a n c e l l a t i o n

E f f e c t o f 

A s s i s t a n t to U n i o n 

A u t h o r i t y o f N e g o t i a t o r 

B a r g a i n i n g R e q u e s t 

B u r d e n o f P r o o f

B y - P a s s i n g E x c l u s i v e R e p r e s e n t a t i v e

C e a s e a n d D e s i s t O r d e r s

C h a r g e

C h e c k o f f R e v o c a t i o n 

C S C G u i d a n c e

C o m p l a i n a n t ' s O b l i g a t i o n s 

C o m p l a i n t

30 12 00; 30 16 00

35 08 04; 35 08 08 

35 28 00

30 28 00

35 08 04; 35 24 00; 

35 28 00

30 28 00

35 16 00

35 24 00; 35 28 00 

35 28 00

30 08 00; 35 12 00 

35 28 00

45 00 00; 50 00 00 

30 04 00

35 24 00; 35 28 00; 

45 04 00

35 04 04

30 04 00; 30 08 00; 

30 12 00

30 04 00; 30 16 00; 

See A l s o : C O M P L A I N T

35 08 04

35 08 04

35 28 00

6-30-76 191
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES (cont.)

C o m p l i a n c e 45 00 00

C o u n t e r p r o p o s a l s 35 28 00

C r e d i b i l i t y R e s o l u t i o n s b y H E (ALJ) 30 16 00

C S C G u i d a n c e 35 0 4 0 4

D i l a t o r y N e g o t i a t i o n s 35 28 00

D i s c r i m i n a t o r y T r e a t m e n t 35 08 0 4

D i s m i s s a l of C o m p l a i n t 30 08 00

D i s p a r a t e T r e a t m e n t 35 08 04

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f L i t e r a t u r e 35 08 08

D u e s A l l o t m e n t s R e v o c a t i o n 35

45

24

16

0 0 ;

00

35

E f f e c t of O t h e r P r o c e e d i n g s 05 20 0 0 ; 30

E m e r g e n c y A c t i o n 35 28 00

E m p l o y e e Status, E f f e c t o n U L P 30 24 00

E v i d e n c e See: E V I D E N C E

G o o d F a i t h N e g o t i a t i o n s 35 28 00

G r i e v a n c e 35 28 00

G r i e v a n c e o r ^ p e a l s P r o c e d u r e 35 32 00

G r i e v a n c e , U n i l a t e r a l A d j u s t m e n t 35 08 04; 35

" G r o u n d R u l e s " in N e g o t i a t i o n s 35 28 00

H E (ALJ) R e p o r t , N o E x c e p t i o n s 30 16 00

H e a r i n g s 30 12 00; 

H E A R I N G S

See

I n t e r f e r e n c e

A g e n c y 35 08 00

192 6-30-76
I UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES (cont.)

Interference (conto)

u n i o n 401 0£! 00

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f A g r e e m e n t 30 281 00

I n v e s t i g a t i o n and R e p o r t 30 08 00

Lab O r g U L P 40 00 00

L x m i t e d to C o m p l a i n t A l l e g a t i o n s 30 12 00

"Make W h o l e " O r d e r 35 20 00

M o o t n e s s 30 28 0 0 ; 35' 20 00

M o t i o n s 30 12 00

N e g o t i a b i l i t y 35 28 00

N e g o t i a t i o n s 35 28 00

G r o u n d R u l e s 35 28 00

Sid e A g r e e m e n t s 35 28 00

N o - D i s t r i b u t i o n R u l e 35 08 08

N o - S o l i c i t a t i o n R u l e 35 08 12

N o n - A c c e s s to W o r k A r e a s 35 08 04

N o n w o r k Are a C a m p a i g n i n g 35 08 08; 35 08 12

N o n w o r k T i m e C a m p a i g n i n g 35 08 08; 35 08 12

N o t i f i c a t i o n o f C o m p l i a n c e 45 100 i00 ; 50 00 00

O b l i g a t i o n to C o n s u l t , C o n f e r 

or N e g o t i a t e

P o s t - H e a r i n g P r o c e d u r e

P r o c e d u r e

H e a r i n g

35 28 GO 

30 16 00

30 16 00; 30 20 00; 

30 12 00

6-30-76 193
U N F A I R L A B O R P R A C T I C E S (cont.) 

P r o c e d u r e (cont.) 

I n v e s t i g a t i o n 30 08 00

R e c o g n i t i o n , F a i l u r e to A c c o r d 35 08 04; 35 28 00

R e f u s a l to C o n f e r , C o n s u l t , :

N e g o t i a t e ■

A g e n c y 35 28 00

U n i o n 40 28 00

R e f u s a l to S i g n A g r e e m e n t 35 28 00

R e l a t e d P r o c e e d i n g s 05 20 0 0 ; 30 28 00

R e m e d i a l O r d e r s 45 qo 0 0 ; 50 00 00

R e p o r t o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n 30 08 00

R e q u e s t fo r B a r g a i n i n g 35. 28 00 

R e q u i s i t e s for C h a r g e s and

C o m p l a i n t s 30 04 00 

R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for Acts of

I n d i v i d u a l 35 08 08

R e v o c a t i o n o f C h e c k o f f 35 24 00; 35 28 00;

45 04 00

Sections of EG See: EO 1 1 4 9 1, AND AS

AMENDED

Solicitation for Membership 35 08 12

Stipulated Record 30 08 00

Strike 40 20 00

"Successorship" Doctrine 35 24 00

Terminating Agreement 35 28 00 

Undermining Exclusive

R e p r e s e n t a t i v e 35 28 00

194 6-30-76
U n i l a t e r a l A c t i o n 35 q8 04; 35 28 00

U n i o n U L P 40 OO 00

U n i t A p p r o p r i a t e n e s s 35 28 00

W a i v e r o f E G R i g h t s 35 q4 08

W o r k S t o p p a g e 40 20 00

U N I L A T E R A L A C T I O N 35 28 00

U N I O N See: LAB ORG

U NIT See; A P P R O PRIATE UNIT

- V-Z -

UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES (cont.)

V A L I D I T Y OF S H O W I N G O F I N T E R E S T 10 16 00

V O T E R 20 16 12

Eligibility- 20 20 00

I n t e n t 25 12 08

P r o f Emps 25 04 04

S e l f - D e t e r m i n a t i o n 25 04 08

V O T I N G G R O U P S 25 04 00

W A I V E R OF

A g r e e m e n t B a r R u l e 10 24 12

C h a l l e n g e to I n t e r v e n t i o n 25 08 08

E O R i g h t s 35 04 08

E x c l u s i v e R e c o g n i t i o n 10 28 00

W I T H D R A W A L O P P O R T U N I T Y 20 16 12

6-30-76

195
L M S A P ers 05 12 04

O b l i g a t i o n s of P a r t i e s 15 20 00; 30 08 00;

35 08 04; 35 28 00

O f f i c i a l T i m e 05 08 00; 35 08 04

R e q u e s t for A p p e a r a n c e 15 20 00; 35 08 04

T e s t i m o n y 15 20 00

W O R K A R E A C A M P A I G N I N G 35 08 08; 35 08 12

W O R K S T O P P A G E 40 24 00

WITNESSES 15 12 00

196 6-30-76

☆ U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1976 O - 210-882 (186)



r