Thirty-eight years – promoting and protecting labormanagement relations for effective, efficient government.

WWW.FLRA.GOV 

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
UNITED STATES

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

Congressional Budget Justification

Fiscal Year 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY.......................................1

Background and Mission .................................................................................................................1

Organizational Structure ..................................................................................................................1

Agency Trends and Challenges .......................................................................................................4

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................14

Appropriation Language ................................................................................................................14

FY 2018 Funding Request .............................................................................................................14

Change from FY 2017 ...................................................................................................................15

Program and Financing Schedule ..................................................................................................16

Object Classification Schedule ......................................................................................................17

Employment Summary Schedule...................................................................................................17

Inspector General Resources..........................................................................................................18

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN....................................................................21

Strategic and Performance-Planning Framework ..........................................................................21

Goal 1.1.1: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Unfair-Labor-Practice Cases ...............29

Goal 1.2.1: Resolve Overage Unfair-Labor-Practice Cases in a Timely Fashion ........................31

Goal 1.1.2: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Representation Cases...........................32

Goal 1.2.2: Resolve Overage Representation Cases in a Timely Fashion....................................33

Goal 1.1.3: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Arbitration Cases.................................34

Goal 1.2.3: Resolve Overage Arbitration Cases in a Timely Fashion ..........................................35

Goal 1.1.4: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Negotiability Cases..............................35

Goal 1.2.4: Resolve Overage Negotiability Cases in a Timely Fashion..............................36

Goal 1.1.5: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Bargaining-Impasse Cases...................36

Goal 2.1.1: Provide Targeted Access to Training, Outreach, and Facilitation Activities within 

the Labor-Management Community.........................................................................38

Goal 2.2.1: Successfully Resolve a Significant Portion of FLRA Cases through ADR...............39

Goal 3.1.1: Recruit, Retain, and Develop a Highly Talented, Motivated, and Diverse

Workforce to Accomplish the FLRA’s Mission.......................................................42

Goal 3.1.2: Improve Use of Existing Technology and Deploy New IT Systems to Streamline and 

Enhance Organizational Operations .........................................................................47
U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

BACKGROUND AND MISSION

The U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) is responsible for establishing policies and 

guidance regarding the labor-management-relations program for 2.1 million non-Postal, Federal 

employees worldwide, approximately 1.2 million of whom are represented in 2,200 bargaining 

units. The FLRA was created by Title VII of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, also known 

as the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute). The agency’s genesis 

dates from the issuance of Executive Order 10988 by President Kennedy in 1962. In 2012, the 

FLRA celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Order, which established the first 

Government-wide, labor-management-relations program within the Federal Government. In 

1970, President Nixon established the Federal Labor Relations Council, by Executive 

Order 11491, to administer the Federal labor-management-relations program and to make final 

decisions on policy questions and major disputes arising under Executive Order 10988. 

Executive Order 11491, as amended, was the basis for President Carter’s proposal to the 

Congress to create the FLRA as an independent agency.

The Statute protects management’s rights, employees’ rights, and union rights. For example, the 

Statute protects the authority of agency management to determine, among other things, the 

agency’s mission, budget, organization, number of employees, and internal security practices. It 

also protects the rights of Federal employees to form, join, or assist a labor organization, or to 

refrain from such activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal. It is the role of the 

FLRA to provide leadership in establishing policies, guidance, and case law relating to all of 

these statutory rights and responsibilities. 

The mission of the FLRA is to promote stable, constructive labor-management relations through 

the timely resolution and prevention of labor disputes in a manner that gives full effect to the 

collective-bargaining rights of employees, unions, and agencies. Although the FLRA is a small 

agency, accomplishing its mission – including timely, quality, and impartial resolution of labormanagement disputes – is essential for program performance Government-wide. 

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The FLRA is organized into three statutory components – the Authority, the Office of the 

General Counsel (OGC), and the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP) – each with unique 

adjudicative or prosecutorial roles. The agency also provides full program and staff support to 

two other organizations – the Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and the Foreign Service 

Labor Relations Board.
2

The Authority

The Authority comprises three full-time, presidentially nominated and Senate-confirmed 

Members who are appointed for fixed, five-year, staggered terms. The President designates one 

Member to serve as Chairman. The Chairman acts as the agency’s chief executive and 

administrative officer. 

The Authority is responsible for adjudicating unfair labor practice (ULP) complaints, 

determining whether to grant exceptions to arbitrators’ awards, resolving disputes over the

negotiability of proposals and provisions made during collective bargaining, and reviewing 

representation decisions of Regional Directors in representation disputes over union elections 

and unit determinations.

Other program offices under the jurisdiction of the Authority include the Office of the Solicitor, 

the Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ), the Office of Case Intake and Publication

(CIP), and the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO). 

The Office of the Solicitor represents the FLRA in court proceedings before all U.S. courts, 

including the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the Federal District Courts. 

In this connection, parties aggrieved by certain Authority orders may institute an action for 
3

judicial review within 60 days after the order issues. The Authority may also seek enforcement 

of its orders, temporary relief, or restraining orders in the appropriate U.S. Courts of Appeals or 

Federal District Courts. The Office of the Solicitor also serves as the agency’s in-house counsel, 

providing legal advice to all FLRA components, and performs various functions under the 

Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act. The Solicitor also serves as the Designated 

Agency Ethics Official.

The Authority Members appoint Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) to hear and prepare 

recommended decisions in cases involving ULP complaints, as well as decisions involving 

applications for attorney fees filed pursuant to the Back Pay Act or the Equal Access to Justice 

Act. The OALJ – through its Settlement Judge Program administered by the CADRO – also 

provides alternative-dispute resolution (ADR) services in all ULP cases. Recommended 

Decisions of the ALJs may be appealed to the Authority.

The Office of the General Counsel

The General Counsel, who is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the 

Senate, has separate and independent responsibilities from the Authority. Under the Statute, the 

General Counsel has sole responsibility – independent of the Authority – over the investigation 

and prosecution of ULP cases. The General Counsel’s determinations in these matters are final 

and unreviewable. The General Counsel has direct authority over, and responsibility for, all 

employees in the OGC, including those in the FLRA’s Regional Offices. Approximately 

50 percent of the entire FLRA staff is employed in the regions, where all ULP charges and 

representation petitions are filed and investigated. The Regional Offices, on behalf of the 

General Counsel, investigate and resolve alleged ULPs, file and prosecute ULP complaints, 

effectuate compliance with settlement agreements and Authority Orders, and provide training 

and ADR services. In addition, through delegation by the Authority, the Regional Offices 

investigate and resolve representation cases and conduct secret-ballot elections. 

The General Counsel has a small staff at FLRA Headquarters, located in Washington, D.C. 

Headquarters management provides administrative oversight; develops policies, guidance, 

procedures, and manuals that provide programmatic direction for the Regional Offices and 

training and education for the parties; and processes appeals from the Regional Offices’ 

dismissals of ULP charges. Each Regional Office is headed by a Regional Director who 

provides leadership and management expertise for the respective region. Collectively, the 

Regional Directors work with senior management throughout the FLRA to develop and 

implement policy and strategic initiatives to accomplish the FLRA mission. 
4

The Federal Service Impasses Panel

The FSIP resolves impasses between Federal agencies and unions representing Federal 

employees arising from negotiations over conditions of employment under the Statute and the 

Federal Employees Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules Act. The FSIP normally 

comprises seven part-time Presidential appointees – a Chairman and six other Members – who 

are appointed for five-year terms. 

If bargaining between the parties, followed by mediation assistance, does not result in a 

voluntary agreement, then either party or the parties, jointly, may request the FSIP’s assistance. 

Following a preliminary investigation by its staff, the FSIP may determine to assert jurisdiction 

over the request. If the FSIP asserts jurisdiction, then it has the authority to recommend or direct 

the use of various ADR procedures, including informal conferences, additional mediation, factfinding, written submissions, and mediation-arbitration by FSIP Members, the FSIP’s staff, or 

private arbitrators. If the parties are still unable to reach a voluntary settlement, then the FSIP 

may take whatever action it deems necessary to resolve the dispute, including imposition of 

contract terms through a final action. Parties may not appeal the merits of the FSIP’s decision to 

any court.

AGENCY TRENDS AND CHALLENGES

The FLRA’s mission is to promote stable, constructive labor-management relations through the 

timely and effective resolution and prevention of labor disputes in a manner that gives full effect 

to the collective-bargaining rights of employees, unions, and agencies. Accomplishing its 

mission in an effective and efficient manner contributes to enabling the Federal Government, as 

a whole, to adapt to changing circumstances, as necessary, to continue delivering the highest 

quality services to the American public. 
5

Mission – Case Processing & ADR

With respect to its mission accomplishments, the FLRA as a whole has continued its significant 

improvement over the last seven and a half years in providing customers with timely and quality 

adjudication and dispute-resolution services. And it has done so against a backdrop of increased 

case filings and backlogs in certain components, and relatively flat funding and staffing levels. It 

also experienced a wave of key employee retirements and departures starting in FY 2013 and 

continuing into FY 2016. This left well over 10 percent of the FLRA’s already-small workforce 

vacant to start FY 2014, and the agency devoted significant effort to rebuilding its workforce 

throughout FY 2014, FY 2015, and FY 2016. But despite these challenges, in FY 2016, the 

FLRA overcame nearly all of these obstacles – meeting or exceeding nearly every missionrelated performance goal. 

Currently, in FY 2017, the agency has twenty vacant positions from FY 2016. Eighteen of those 

positions are career positions, with the majority resting within the Office of the Executive 

Director, which encompasses all of the agency’s support services offices. Consistent with the 

Administration’s goal of comprehensive Government reform and workforce reshaping, the 

agency is already well-experienced in “doing more with less,” and it is well-versed in 

undertaking a thorough evaluation and prioritization of every vacancy that it fills. 

 

 Authority (including OALJ, CADRO)

The Authority began FY 2016 with no “overage” cases due in large part to its successful 

implementation and completion of a case-issuance strategy (an action plan) in FY 2015. That 

achievement enabled the Authority to meet or exceed all of its case-processing performance 

goals in FY 2016. In this regard, the Authority’s FY 2016 goals were to issue 75 percent of 

arbitration, ULP, and negotiability cases within 180 days of assignment to Authority staff. The 

Authority met the 75 percent goal with respect to negotiability cases, and exceeded it with regard 

to ULP cases (89 percent) and arbitration cases (79 percent). In addition, as in previous years, 

the Authority continued to meet its goal – required by law to be 100 percent – of issuing

decisions, within 60 days of appeal, as to whether to grant review of FLRA Regional Directors’ 

decisions in representation cases. 

As a result of these performance successes, and consistent with the FLRA’s 2015-2018 Strategic 

Plan, the Authority changed its performance measures beginning in FY 2017 to both shorten 

case-processing times – from 180 to 150 days in 75 percent of non-representation cases – and to 

develop measures for ensuring that the cases not “captured” by those 75 percent do not go 

significantly overage. In the latter regard, the Authority created new measures for ensuring that 

95 percent of all cases issue within 365 days. In short, the Authority’s FY 2016 performance 

successes make it well positioned to more efficiently and expeditiously process all of its cases in 

FY 2017 and continuing into FY 2018. 

But it is important to note that the Authority currently has only two of its three presidentially 

appointed and Senate-confirmed Members. Although the attorneys continue to prepare draft 

decisions, in the event that the two current Members are unable to reach consensus on the 
6

disposition of a case, no decision may issue. As such, there is a small – but growing – backlog 

of Authority cases. 

Moreover, in FY 2016, the Authority continued to update its training materials and other 

educational tools. Specifically, the Authority updated its comprehensive Guide to Arbitration 

under the Statute, which provides guidance to arbitrators and parties to arbitration cases – the 

most common case type filed with the Authority. Additionally, the Authority continued to 

review and make regular updates to its Comprehensive Arbitration Training program (including 

instructional slides, interactive exercises, and other handouts), which it presented to its parties 

several times throughout the year. Further, the Authority updated its Comprehensive 

Negotiability Training program and delivered several training sessions to the FLRA’s customers 

– and internal staff – in FY 2016. The currency of these materials and the provision of up-todate, relevant training have resulted in parties being better educated about the Authority’s law 

and case-processing requirements, which has resulted in the Authority receiving higher-quality, 

better-drafted briefs. That, in turn, enables the Authority to more efficiently and expeditiously 

process those cases.

As for the OALJ, in FY 2016, that office had a performance goal of deciding 50 percent of its 

cases within 180 days of issuance of a ULP complaint by the OGC. The OALJ significantly 

exceeded that goal, issuing decisions on 80 percent of ULP complaints within 180 

days. However, the OALJ fell slightly shy of its new, “overage” performance goal of deciding 

98 percent of all ULP cases within 365 days of the complaint being issued – deciding 89 percent 

of its decisions within that timeframe. This is because the OALJ had an ongoing effort to 

eliminate “overage” cases, which meant that a larger number of significantly older cases were 

processed to completion during the course of FY 2016. With this focus on issuing overage cases, 

it made it difficult for the OALJ to achieve a 98 percent rate. But the OALJ ended FY 2016 with 

only a single case older than 365 days, which should enable the OALJ to meet its goal in 

FY 2017.

The OALJ has successfully resolved cases without the need for costly litigation involving a 

hearing or written decision through use of the OALJ Settlement Judge Program – with ADR 

services administered by the CADRO. In FY 2016, in over 74 percent of cases in which the 

parties participated in the Settlement Judge Program, they reached agreement and fully resolved 

their dispute. While this fell slightly short of the goal of partial or full resolution in 89 percent of 

cases, that is attributable to the 42 percent drop in the number of post-complaint ULP cases in 

which parties requested Settlement Judge services, and it was consistent with the 30 percent drop 

in total cases resolved by the OALJ during FY 2016. What remained for the Settlement Judge 

Program was a smaller universe of the most difficult cases to voluntarily resolve. Nevertheless, 

the program fully resolved 34 post-complaint ULP cases, which was only 5 cases short of the 85 

percent goal.

This is real evidence that the delivery of ADR services at all stages of case processing results in 

more effective and cost-efficient program performance for the FLRA, as well as the timely 

resolution of disputes for its customers. As a result, the OALJ has seen a decrease in demand for 

hearings. For those cases that cannot be settled without a hearing, the ALJs continue to 
7

encourage the parties to request a bench decision, where appropriate under the facts of the case, 

to reduce the need for final written decisions.

In addition to its highly successful work with the OALJ Settlement Judge Program, the CADRO 

continues to have great success in helping parties before the Authority to resolve significant 

disputes in pending cases, most significantly in negotiability cases, but also increasingly 

expanding to include arbitration cases. In FY 2016, 100 percent of CADRO negotiability cases 

resulted in full or partial resolution of the underlying dispute and closure of the pending case –

exceeding the 90-percent goal in that category.

Additionally, in FY 2016, the CADRO had goals of offering ADR services in 50 percent of 

appropriate arbitration cases, and 75 percent of appropriate Authority ULP cases. These goals 

were premised on the notion that the Authority would develop criteria for assessing the 

appropriateness of offering ADR in particular arbitration and ULP cases, and that the CADRO 

would then proactively contact parties and offer its services in the specified percentages of each 

type of case. In arbitration cases, the CADRO often receives requests for assistance from parties 

– or requests from Authority Member offices to intervene – in cases that have not been screened 

for appropriateness for affirmatively offering ADR services. And CADRO has a separate goal of 

partial or total resolution in 75 percent of the arbitration cases in which does provide services. In 

FY 2016, it exceeded that goal by achieving full or partial resolution in 79 percent of those 

cases. 

Overall, in FY 2016, the CADRO resolved 34 post-complaint ULP cases, 245 disputes over 

proposed or disapproved contract wording in 36 negotiability cases, and 11 arbitrationexceptions cases. Almost all of these cases would have otherwise required decisions by the 

Authority.

The value of the CADRO’s services goes far beyond the staff hours and the taxpayer dollars that 

it saves. The stakeholders in these cases were able to solve difficult problems beyond their 

pending legal disputes. For example, in one negotiability case concerning nine disputed 

provisions of a Cabinet-level agency’s national term contract, the agency and the union met with 

CADRO staff through a series of face-to-face and remote sessions. They not only resolved all 

negotiability questions in that particular case, but they also reached full agreement on all of the 

parties’ outstanding collective-bargaining matters and signed off on a new labor agreement 

covering almost 90,000 employees. This was only one of several national term contracts that the 

CADRO helped parties complete during this fiscal year.

In another case, an agency and a union still had unresolved collective-bargaining disputes after 

conducting multiple mediation sessions with a Federal mediator from the FMCS. The union 

filed a ULP charge concerning the same negotiations and asked the FSIP to resolve the parties’ 

stalled negotiations. The agency then declared 15 union proposals nonnegotiable, so the union 

filed a negotiability petition with the Authority. The union initially rejected the CADRO’s offer 

of ADR services and expressed a desire proceed with litigation. The CADRO team did not give 

up, and the parties eventually agreed to try ADR. When the CADRO team finished, the union 

voluntarily withdrew 14 proposals and asked the Authority to rule on the negotiability of only 

the one remaining proposal.
8

And, in another case, the national office of a Federal-sector labor union contacted the CADRO 

concerning its petition before the FLRA to clarify the bargaining-unit status of about 30 positions 

in a cabinet-level agency. The formal FLRA procedure in such cases is for the agency and the 

union to participate in a hearing before a representative of the OGC, after which the OGC 

renders a determination. The union and the agency in this case jointly expressed a desire to 

instead use CADRO services to collaboratively resolve the status of the 30 disputed 

positions. CADRO staff obtained the concurrence and participation of the OGC, and it 

conducted a 2-day ADR session. At the conclusion, the agency and the union fully agreed on the 

bargaining-unit status of all thirty positions, and the OGC ratified their agreement by issuing an 

amended unit certification. 

Additionally, as noted above, the Authority’s Members sometimes ask the CADRO to invite 

arbitration-exception litigants to engage in ADR. The Authority did so on at least five occasions 

during FY 2016, and the CADRO was able to fully resolve all of those cases. In one such case, a 

union took exception to an arbitration award that both parties were confident would not be 

disturbed by the Authority. The arbitrator dismissed the grievance on procedural 

grounds. Neither party initially requested ADR assistance from the FLRA, but both parties 

agreed to use the CADRO’s services after CADRO staff contacted them.

The parties universally reported that CADRO’s ADR services improve their ability to resolve 

important problems, make critical decisions, and develop more successful problem-solving 

relationships. And the CADRO’s efforts serve the dual purpose of preventing unnecessary and 

costly litigation before the FLRA and making case processing more effective and 

efficient. Moreover, the CADRO also delivers “prevention” services, teaching parties techniques 

for effectively resolving labor-management issues on their own, without the need for third-party 

involvement. These types of services have helped the parties develop constructive workplace 

relationships that promote more effective and efficient mission performance, as well as quality of 

work life – real evidence that the program works.

 OGC

The OGC continued delivering strong results in FY 2016. The OGC met its strategic 

performance goals for the timely resolution of ULP and representation cases (resolving over 

70 percent of all ULP and representation cases within 120 days of the filing date) and continued 

closing cases at increased rates. The OGC closed over 4,100 ULP and 220 representation cases

in FY 2016. In addition, the OGC conducted 49 secret-ballot representation elections. 

In conjunction with the OGC’s emphasis on resolving cases in a timely and high-quality manner, 

the OGC has expanded its use of voluntary ADR services to resolve cases. This is particularly 

important as the OGC has the largest case intake among all of the FLRA components (handling 

over three quarters of the FLRA’s total case intake) and is the FLRA component with which the 

parties have the most direct contact. The beneficial effects of voluntary ULP settlements and 

representation agreements are obvious, and the OGC aggressively pursues them.

In FY 2016, the OGC resolved over 790 ULP cases by voluntary adjustment during the 

investigative process. In addition, the OGC resolved 95 percent of meritorious ULP cases and 
9

over 98 percent of the representation cases in which the parties agreed to use the OGC’s ADR 

services. These successful voluntary ADR efforts resulted in significant savings of 

Governmental staff and budgetary resources. For example, during FY 2016, an agency and a 

union asked the OGC to assist them in rehabilitating their relationship, which had become 

adversarial and dispute ridden. The OGC met with the parties on-site, engaged the parties in a 

collaborative effort to resolve their outstanding disputes, and provided both knowledge and 

skills-enhancement training. Through the OGC’s assistance, the parties resolved their 

outstanding disputes and embarked on a new labor-management relationship based on 

cooperation and respect.

 FSIP

In FY 2016, the FSIP again exceeded all of its timeliness goals for assisting parties in resolving 

their bargaining-impasse disputes. The most common types of impasses involved impact-andimplementation negotiations over changes in agency policies or procedures, as well as 

negotiations over successor collective-bargaining agreements, which arise when the current 

collective-bargaining agreement has expired, or is about to expire. Both types of disputes are 

critical and time-sensitive. Impact-and-implementation-bargaining disputes often involve 

negotiations over agency changes to policy or procedure to improve efficiency in the delivery of 

its mission. Successful and timely resolution of the impasse allows the parties to move forward 

in implementing the proposed change. 

Both the number and types of issues presented in requests for FSIP assistance can vary greatly 

from case to case. But the most common issues that the parties asked the FSIP to assist with in 

FY 2016 involved office-space-related matters: how much work space will be allocated to 

employees; office layout; and equipment. As discussed in more detail below, recognizing this 

trend in bargaining-impasse disputes, the FSIP participated in a number of cross-component 

(OGC, Authority, FSIP) and inter-agency (GSA, FMCS) to develop and deliver various trainings 

and webinars on collaborating and negotiating over space-related issues. 

The FSIP is free to use whatever methods and procedures it considers appropriate for quickly 

and effectively resolving the dispute. The FSIP most commonly resolves impasse disputes using 

mediation-arbitration proceedings or informal conferences conducted by FSIP Members. 

Mediation-arbitration is a process that allows the assigned FSIP Member to begin work on the 

case as a neutral mediator seeking to help the parties reach voluntary resolution of their dispute –

meeting with parties, conveying proposals and counterproposals, suggesting compromises, and 

otherwise seeking to bridge the gap between the parties. But if those mediation efforts are not 

successful in achieving a voluntary settlement, then the FSIP Member takes on the mantle of an 

arbitrator, conducting a hearing and issuing a final and binding Arbitration Opinion and Decision 

that resolves the bargaining impasse. 

This approach is consistent with the FSIP’s guiding philosophy that the voluntary settlement of 

bargaining impasses using mediation-arbitration techniques is the most effective and efficient 

form of dispute resolution. In fact, in cases where the FSIP used mediation-arbitration or 

informal conferences to resolve Federal-sector impasses, it obtained complete, voluntary 

settlements over 55 percent of the time. As a result of this high percentage of voluntary 
10

settlements, in FY 2016, the FSIP Members imposed contract terms on the parties in only 

12 cases – approximately 10 percent of the FSIP’s caseload. The remainder of the FSIP’s cases 

were voluntarily withdrawn or settled by the parties – achieving the most ideal solution while 

also minimizing the disruption to Government operations and costs to taxpayers. 

One particularly challenging case involved the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) 

and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU). As one of the few Federal agencies that 

may negotiate over employee pay, the OCC was unable to reach agreement with NTEU over the 

issues of merit-pay increases and locality-pay increases. The parties each submitted voluminous 

evidence to support their respective positions and, when the parties were not able to voluntarily 

resolve their dispute, the FSIP Member then served as an arbitrator and crafted an Arbitration 

Opinion and Decision. Ultimately, his timely decision found a balance between the parties’ 

expressed interests while timely resolving the dispute.

Mission Accomplishment – Providing Training and Education across the Federal Government

Consistent with its strategic goals, in FY 2016, the FLRA continued to promote stability in the 

Federal labor-management community by providing leadership and guidance through education 

and reference resources, including the launch of its redesigned website (www.FLRA.gov), 

web-based and in-person trainings, and the release and update of substantive guides and 

manuals. 

With the launch of its redesigned website – including improvements to the site’s appearance, 

organizational structure, and revision of all substantive content – the FLRA now provides a truly 

user-friendly, empowering resource for parties to FLRA cases and the broader Federal-sector 

labor-management community. Addressing feedback from both internal and external customers 

that they were often unable to locate the case-related information that they were seeking or that it 

took too many mouse clicks to access, the FLRA developed a more intuitive, user friendly, and 

accessible organizational structure based on the case types that the various program offices 

within the FLRA process. That is, rather than site visitors having to know which office does 

what and at which particular stage during a case, now they have only to search by the case type, 

and they will find descriptions of each office’s unique functions in that context. The new site is 

fully “integrated”: Every FLRA training opportunity, written guide, or manual is now available 

on one centralized page, rather than on office-specific pages. And there is even an online tool 

that allows customers, for the first time, to register for all FLRA training events directly through 

the website. The organization around case types, rather than individual office functions, allows 

users to navigate to the pages they want to access most – and in fewer mouse clicks. 

Additionally, as part of this initiative, the FLRA made electronically available to its customers 

relevant “archival” and other materials (e.g., decisions of predecessor agencies, legislative 

history of the Agency’s implementing Statute, decisions of the Foreign Service Labor Relations 

Board) that had previously been unavailable outside of the FLRA’s physical library location. 

Feedback on the new site is universally positive, and the agency has reaped – and will continue 

to reap – dividends from the improvement to the overall customer experience for years to come. 

The FLRA continued to provide web-based and in-person training nationwide to members of the 

Federal-sector labor-management community – union representatives, agency representatives, 
11

and neutrals – in all aspects of its case law and processes. In FY 2016, the FLRA, as a whole, 

provided 280 training, outreach, and facilitation sessions to over 8,400 participants. Over the last 

6 years, the FLRA has provided nearly 1,700 such sessions to nearly 50,000 participants 

worldwide. The Authority, the OGC, and the FSIP provided training at several nationwide, 

annual conferences, including the Society of Federal Labor and Employee Relations 

Professionals (SFLERP) symposium and the Federal Dispute Resolution (FDR) conference. 

These sessions included presentations of newly prepared materials of current relevance, as well 

as updated materials for more standard sessions. 

In addition, the Authority sponsored its own training programs, including several, full-day 

sessions of Comprehensive Arbitration Training and Comprehensive Negotiability Training

using, as noted above, updated training materials (including instructional slides, interactive 

exercises, and other handouts). In particular, because negotiability cases have the highest rate of 

procedural dismissals of any type of case filed with the Authority, the negotiability training is 

intended to meet the goals of helping the parties to: comply with the Authority’s regulatory 

procedural requirements (thus reducing case-processing time); file their cases in a different, 

appropriate forum when necessary; and use ADR to avoid costly litigation. The overwhelmingly 

positive feedback received from participants in these sessions indicates that these trainings 

produced the desired results and will further the above goals in future cases. Moreover, the 

Authority Members all personally conducted various training sessions on arbitration cases and 

other topics of interest to the Federal-sector labor-management community, including in 

conjunction with SFLERP, FDR, the FMCS, and the National Academy of Arbitrators 

(NAA). For example – recognizing that arbitration cases make up the vast majority of cases that 

come before the Authority, and that many arbitrators who primarily hear private-sector cases 

lack significant experience in Federal-sector disputes and need training – Member DuBester 

provided targeted training to arbitrators at NAA gatherings in both Atlantic City, New Jersey, 

and New Orleans, Louisiana. In fact, for the New Orleans training, Member DuBester enlisted 

the assistance of two experienced Federal-sector arbitrators, who assisted with communicating to 

the arbitrators “in their own language” the differences between private-sector and Federal-sector 

arbitration. 

The OGC continued to focus its training efforts on the front lines, where the work is done and 

where its efforts can have immediate and lasting effect. By bringing its training services directly 

to the parties, the OGC educates management and labor representatives on their rights and 

responsibilities under the Statute, thereby empowering them to more effectively and efficiently 

avoid – and if necessary, resolve – workplace disputes at the lowest level. 

The OGC continued – and expanded – it efforts to provide timely and effective training in 

support of OMB’s and the GSA’s ongoing “Reduce the Footprint” initiative. A two-day 

cross-component (OGC, Authority, FSIP) and inter-agency (FMCS and GSA) workshop, 

conducted in July 2015, focused on resolving labor-relations issues associated with the “Reduce 

the Footprint” policy, office moves, and relocations in a cooperative and collaborative manner. 

Because this program was so successful and demand was so great, the OGC collaborated with 

the FMCS and the GSA to design and conduct similar two-day workshops on space management 

and labor relations in Boston, Chicago, Denver, and Los Angeles in FY 2016. These workshops 

– held in the spring of 2016 and made available at no charge to participants – featured:
12

 a tour of a redesigned Federal space;

 an overview by GSA of its owned- and leased-space project lifecycle and key 

opportunities for employee engagement and labor-management collaboration;

 a review by the OGC of the statutory duty and scope of bargaining related to office 

moves, as well as opportunities for pre-decisional involvement (PDI) during office 

moves;

 training on collaborative problem-solving skills training and resources by the FMCS to 

support effective PDI and collective bargaining; and

 discussions with agencies and labor organizations that had recently gone through office 

moves about their experiences and lessons learned.

Although registration exceeded capacity for each session, more than 500 individuals participated 

in the workshops. Significantly, 40 percent of the attendees participated in the workshops jointly 

with their union or labor counterparts as “labor-management pairs.” The OGC also assisted in 

developing web-based versions of the training materials, and provided specialized training on 

office moves and relocations to labor and management representatives in a number of agencies. 

The OGC has continued to provide the parties with training on their rights and responsibilities 

under the Statute, delivering over 100 sessions and reaching over 4,300 participants in FY 2016, 

including several sessions on the comprehensive Guidance on Meetings that it issued in FY 

2015. This is a key strategic ADR and education activity as it reduces and prevents disputes 

through active education. The OGC also continued providing the parties with up-to-date and 

topical web-based resources, including revisions to its Representation Case Law Outline. The 

OGC’s web-based resources – particularly the ULP Case Law Outline – are go-to resources for 

the parties, and they have elicited much favorable feedback.

Employee Engagement

The FLRA is a leader in creating a culture of operational excellence and employee engagement 

to enable higher mission performance. 

In FY 2016, the FLRA captured the #1 small-agency ranking in two important indices in the 

2016 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) – Employee Engagement and New IQ – up 

from #2 in both in 2015. The FEVS Engagement Index measures the engagement potential of an 

agency’s work environment, including three sub-factors – Leaders Lead, Supervisors, and 

Intrinsic Work Experience. In addition to scoring #1 overall, the FLRA was also a top scorer 

with respect to Leaders Lead – which reflects employees’ perceptions about their leaders’ 

integrity and behaviors with respect to communication and workforce motivation – and Intrinsic 

Work Experience – which reflects employees’ feelings of motivation and competency related to 

their role in the workplace. The “New IQ” index provides insights into employee perceptions of 

the inclusiveness of their agencies by looking at twenty questions that measure the five “Habits 

of Inclusion” – Fair, Open, Cooperative, Supportive, and Empowering. In addition to scoring #1 

overall, the FLRA was a top scorer in all five habits of inclusion. 

And, for the third consecutive year, the FLRA was recognized as a Top Five small agency in the 

2016 Best Places to Work in the Federal Government rankings. With an overall index score of 80.2, 
13

the FLRA ranks #5 among 29 small agencies, and its index score is over 20 points higher than the 

Government-wide average of 59.4. The rankings also measure employee attitudes regarding 10 

workplace categories. The FLRA ranks #1 in 7 of 10 categories – Effective Leadership; Strategic 

Management; Teamwork; Work-Life Balance; Support for Diversity; and Performance-Based 

Rewards and Advancement. In addition, the FLRA ranks #1 in the Effective Leadership –

Empowerment sub-category, and #2 in the Pay category and the Effective Leadership –

Empowerment sub-category. The FLRA also continues to make steady progress in the Innovation 

category, ranking #5 this year – up from #6 in 2015 and #8 in 2014.

The FLRA’s dramatic and sustained improvement with respect to employee engagement and 

satisfaction over the last seven and a half years reflects the commitment of leadership – at all 

levels and throughout the agency – to manage the agency with transparency and accountability 

and to engage employees. It also demonstrates the commitment and dedication of FLRA 

employees. Concurrent with the agency’s significant increase in employee morale and 

satisfaction since 2009, there has been a marked improvement in the FLRA’s mission 

performance and the delivery of services to its customers. 

 

0

20

40

60

80

100

2005 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Best Places to Work Score
14

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Federal Labor Relations Authority, pursuant 

to Reorganization Plan Numbered 2 of 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 

including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and including hire of experts and consultants, 

hire of passenger motor vehicles, and including official reception and representation expenses 

(not to exceed $1,500) and rental of conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, 

$26,200,000: Provided, That public members of the Federal Service Impasses Panel may be 

paid travel expenses and per diem in lieu of subsistence as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5703) for 

persons employed intermittently in the Government service, and compensation as authorized by 

5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received from 

fees charged to non-Federal participants at labor-management relations conferences shall be 

credited to and merged with this account, to be available without further appropriation for the 

costs of carrying out these conferences.

FY 2018 FUNDING REQUEST

The FLRA requests $26,200,000 in FY 2018 to fund employee salaries and related operating 

expenses necessary to meet its annual performance targets. The agency’s FY 2018 request 

would fund 121 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

(In thousands of dollars)

Program Activity

FY 2016

Actual

FY 2017

Estimated

FY 2018

Request

Change 

from 

FY 2017

Authority $14,493 $14,382 $14,377 $0

Office of the General Counsel 10,660 10,721 10,749 0

Federal Service Impasses Panel 999 1,047 1,074 0

Direct Obligations $26,152 $26,150 $26,200 $0

FTEs 129 129 121 0

The requested FY 2018 funding level incorporates cost-savings measures initiated over the past 

several years to increase program effectiveness and to reduce fragmentation, overlap, and 

duplication. The previous FLRA Headquarters lease in Washington, D.C., for example, expired 

in FY 2013, and, in response to growing participation in the agency telework program, the FLRA 

reduced the size of its Headquarters location by approximately 12,000 square feet, commencing 

with the new lease term.
15

In addition, the initial launch of the FLRA’s modernized website in 2009, and continual 

enhancements to the site, including a 2016 redesign, have allowed the agency to provide timely 

and accurate information to its customers – other Federal agencies, Federal unions, Federal 

employees, and neutrals – including FLRA decisions, legal guidance and memorandums, policy 

documents, legal training and resources, and difficult-to-find archival materials. 

The requested level also reflects a sustained 20 percent decrease in IT spending since FY 2014. 

The FLRA has achieved this savings by strengthening its in-house capacity to develop and 

manage large-scale, agency-wide projects, such as development and implementation of 

electronic case-management and case-filing systems. It also highlights the agency’s successful 

efforts in long-term strategic IT planning.

CHANGE FROM FY 2017

The requested funding level for FY 2018 includes no increase over FY 2017. 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits

The FY 2018 request reflects the statutory pay raises of 2.1 and 1.9 percent in January 2017 and 

January 2018, respectively. Further, FLRA benefits costs, as a percentage of compensation, 

continue to rise as the percentage of the agency’s workforce under the Federal Employees 

Retirement System (FERS) increases. As those in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) 

retire or transfer to other agencies, they are generally replaced by those under the FERS. FERS 

benefits cost the FLRA, on average, twice as much as CSRS benefits, per employee. The 

agency’s personnel-benefits estimate, therefore, assumes that the ongoing, Government-wide 

transition to the FERS will cost the FLRA an additional $150,000 in FY 2018.

Rent

The FLRA makes rental payments to the GSA for office space in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, 

Dallas, Denver, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. An additional $75,000 will be necessary 

in FY 2018 to cover the agency’s annual, inflationary rent increase over FY 2017.

Since 2009, the agency has placed an emphasis on telework, and it seeks to consolidate space 

wherever possible in an effort to reduce operating costs. Since implementation of the telework 

program in January 2010, approximately 80 percent of the FLRA’s workforce has engaged in 

some form of telework, with roughly half of teleworkers engaged “regularly” and the other half 

engaged “periodically.” Telework has also contributed to increased employee morale, as 

measured in the OPM’s FEVS. The opportunity to telework has proven useful as a recruitment

and retention tool, as it has been the deciding factor in job acceptance and has encouraged 

several employees to stay with the agency. In response to growing participation in the FLRA 

telework program, and consistent with Government-wide direction and guidelines, the agency is 

systematically “reducing its footprint” – in recent years reducing the size of its Headquarters 

location by approximately 12,000 square feet in early FY 2014, as well its Boston, Chicago, San 

Francisco, and Denver Regional Offices over the last three years. These reductions in space 

have, in some instances, reduced annual costs, and, in others, allowed the FLRA to avoid the 
16

costs of what would have otherwise been significant rent increases. The FLRA’s Dallas 

Regional Office lease expires in September 2017, and, at that time, the FLRA will again seek to 

reduce its space. 

PROGRAM AND FINANCING SCHEDULE

(In thousands of dollars)

FY 2016 

Actual

FY 2017 

Estimate

FY 2018 

Request

Budgetary resources:

Unobligated balance (total) 1,341 1,341 1,341

Appropriation, discretionary (total) 26,200 26,150 26,200

Spending authority from offsetting collections, 

discretionary (total) 20 100 0

Total budgetary resources 27,561 27,591 27,541

Status of budgetary resources:

Direct obligations (total) 26,226 26,150 26,200

Reimbursable obligations (total) 21 100 0

New obligations and upward adjustments (total) 26,247 26,250 26,200

Unobligated balance, end of year 1,314 1,314 1,314

Total budgetary resources 27,561 27,564 27,514

Change in obligated balance:

Obligated balance, start of year 1,836 3,132 3,132

Obligated balance, end of year 3,132 3,132 3,132

Budget authority and outlays, net:

Budget authority, gross 26,200 26,200 26,200

Outlays, gross (total) 26,000 26,000 26,000

Offsets against gross budget authority and outlays 

(total) (31) (31) 0

Additional offsets against budget authority only 

(total)

10 10 0

Budget authority, net (discretionary) 26,200 26,200 26,200

Outlays, net (discretionary) 26,000 26,000 26,000
17

OBJECT CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE

(In thousands of dollars)

FY 2016 

Actuals

FY 2017 

Estimate

FY 2018 

Request

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

Full-time permanent $14,496 $14,382 $14,415

Other than full-time permanent 539 532 571

Other personnel compensation 385 380 407

Total personnel compensation 15,420 15,294 15,393

Civilian personnel benefits 4,649 4,732 4,771

Travel and transportation of persons 195 165 165

Transportation of things 12 12 12

Rental payments to GSA 2,606 2,662 2,737

Communications, utilities, and misc. charges 315 322 325

Printing and reproduction 16 14 14

Other services from non-federal sources 878 845 895

Other goods and services from Federal sources 1,722 1,800 1,580

Operation and maintenance of facilities 4 4 4

Operation and maintenance of equipment 84 89 93

Supplies and materials 161 121 121

Equipment 90 90 90

Direct obligations $26,152 $26,150 $26,200

Reimbursable obligations:

Travel and transportation of persons 21 100 

Reimbursable obligations 21 100 

Total new obligations $26,173 $26,250 $26,200

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY SCHEDULE

FY 2016 

Actual

FY 2017 

Estimate

FY 2018 

Request

Direct civilian full-time equivalent employment 129 129 121
18

INSPECTOR GENERAL RESOURCES

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provides independent and objective assessments of 

the FLRA’s efficiency, effectiveness, and compliance with laws and regulations. This is 

accomplished through proactive evaluations of agency operational processes. In addition to 

striving to prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse of the FLRA’s resources and operations, a 

key goal of the Inspector General (IG) is to serve as a catalyst for improving operations and 

maximizing the efficiency and integrity of agency programs.

In fulfilling these responsibilities and objectives, the IG conducts and supervises investigations, 

internal reviews, audits, and evaluations of the programs and operations of the agency. The IG 

communicates the results of investigations and assessments to FLRA management, the Congress, 

other oversight entities, and the public, as appropriate. Generally, the IG communicates results 

in formal reports that contain findings and recommendations aimed at correcting any deficiencies 

identified and promoting efficiency and effectiveness in agency programs and operations. The 

IG also manages a hotline to provide employees and the public with a direct means for 

confidentially communicating information on potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

The FLRA’s FY 2018 funding request includes $602,856 for the OIG. The funding level 

requested by the IG, including $8,000 for training and $1,803 to support the Council of the 

Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) has been funded in total. The IG has 

certified that the FLRA’s funding request for the OIG satisfies all training requirements for FY 

2018.
19

April 4, 2017

The Inspector General Reform Act (Pub. L. 110-149) was signed by the President on October 14, 

2008. Section 6(f) (1) of the Inspector General Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. app. 3, was amended to 

require certain specifications concerning Office of Inspector General (OIG) budget submissions 

each fiscal year (FY). 

Each inspector general (IG) is required to transmit a budget request to the head of the 

establishment or designated Federal entity to which the IG reports specifying:

 The aggregate amount of funds requested for the operations of the OIG, 

 The portion of this amount requested for OIG training, including a certification from the 

IG that the amount requested satisfies all OIG training requirements for the fiscal year, 

and 

 The portion of this amount necessary to support the Council of the Inspectors General on 

Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).

The head of each establishment or designated Federal entity, in transmitting a proposed budget to 

the President for approval, shall include:

 An aggregate request for the OIG, 

 The portion of this aggregate request for OIG training,

 The portion of this aggregate request for support of the CIGIE, and

 Any comments of the affected IG with respect to the proposal.

The President shall include in each budget of the U.S. Government submitted to Congress. 

 A separate statement of the budget estimate submitted by each IG,

 The amount requested by the President for each OIG,

 The amount requested by the President for training of OIGs ,

 The amount requested by the President for support of the CIGIE, and 

 Any comments of the affected IG with respect to the proposal if the IG concludes that the 

budget submitted by the President would substantially inhibit the IG from performing 

duties of the OIG.

Following the requirements as specified above, the Federal Labor Relations Authority Inspector 

General submits the following information relating to the OIG’s requested budget for FY 2018:

INSPECTOR GENERAL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20424-0001
20

 The aggregate budget request for the operations of the OIG is $602,856,

 The portion of this amount needed for OIG training is $8,000, and

 The portion of this amount needed to support the CIGIE is $ 1,803. 

I certify as the IG of the Federal Labor Relations Authority that the amount I have requested for 

training satisfies all OIG training needs for FY 2018.

Inspector General

Federal Labor Relations Authority
21

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

STRATEGIC AND PERFORMANCE-PLANNING FRAMEWORK

Through comprehensive review of its operations, staffing, work processes, resource allocations, 

and performance, the FLRA has established strategies and goals that are designed to maximize 

the delivery of agency services throughout the Federal Government. The FLRA engages in 

continuous strategic assessment of performance and other data to ensure that it is accomplishing 

its mission effectively and efficiently.

 

The FLRA’s FY 2018 strategic performance-planning framework is currently based on the 

agency’s FY 2015 - 2018 Strategic Plan, and it is supported by the agency’s Annual Performance 

Plan, which establishes the agency’s annual performance goals and measures. The Annual 

Performance Plan reflects the agency’s commitment to establishing meaningful metrics that will 

assist in assessing performance outcomes, aligning resources, and effectively identifying staffing 

and training needs. Consistent with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

Modernization Act of 2010, in FY 2017, the FLRA will begin development of a new strategic 

plan – that runs at least through 2022 – in order to comply with the Monday, February 5, 2018 

deadline for issuing a new strategic plan following a change in Administration. 

Consistent with ongoing Government-wide efforts to leverage data to facilitate agencies’ 

programmatic work, the FLRA continually and strategically monitors its progress in 

accomplishing the goals and measures set forth in the Annual Performance Plan. This ongoing, 

agency-wide review is conducted on a monthly basis with distribution of the Monthly Analysis 

of Performance and Status (MAPS) Report, which contains statistical case and performance data 

derived from the FLRA’s Case Management System (CMS) and agency management. The 

agency examines the data contained in the MAPS Report in a variety of forums, and it shares the 

agency’s status toward meeting its case-processing performance goals with all employees on a 

monthly basis. At the component and office levels, there are also daily performance assessments 

using a variety of reports, including: case-filing reports, which track the number and age of 

cases; case-status reports, which track the status of all assigned pending cases within the 

Authority, the OGC, and the FSIP; and monthly disposition reports, which track the number, age, 

and resolution type of every closed case within the Authority and the OGC. 

The analysis and assessment of these reports drive, among other things: decisions to target 

services (including training, facilitations, and on-site investigations) to certain parties or 

geographical locations; adjustments in workload through case transfers at the national, regional, 

and office levels; and reallocation of resources, including use of details, contract support, and 

temporary hires. As to the latter point, in FY 2016, in recognition of the upcoming retirement of 

one of the three FLRA ALJs, the FLRA again targeted resources, utilizing cross-component 

details to assist in prioritizing the caseload of the OALJ and ensuring full resolution of the 

retiring ALJ’s case docket. 
22

The FLRA seeks to achieve its strategic goals primarily through the timely, high-quality, and 

impartial review and disposition of cases. The agency supplements these efforts with a focus on

reducing litigation and its attendant costs by helping parties to resolve their own disputes through 

collaboration, ADR, education, and labor-management-cooperation activities. Further 

supporting these efforts is the FLRA’s focus on internal improvements in IT and more effective 

and efficient use of human capital. 
23

FY 2018 Performance Goals 

1.1.1: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Unfair-Labor-Practice Cases

1.2.1: Resolve Overage Unfair-Labor-Practice Cases in a Timely Fashion

1.1.2: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Representation Cases

1.2.2: Resolve Overage Representation Cases in a Timely Fashion

1.1.3: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Arbitration Cases

1.2.3: Resolve Overage Arbitration Cases in a Timely Fashion

1.1.4: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Negotiability Cases

1.2.4: Resolve Overage Negotiability Cases in a Timely Fashion

1.1.5: Produce Timely Review and Disposition of Bargaining-Impasse Cases

2.1.1: Provide Targeted Access to Training, Outreach, and Facilitation Activities within 

the Labor-Management Community

2.2.1: Successfully Resolve a Significant Portion of FLRA Cases through ADR

3.1.1: Recruit, Retain, and Develop a Highly Talented, Motivated, and Diverse

Workforce to Accomplish the FLRA’s Mission

3.1.2: Improve Use of Existing Technology and Deploy New IT Systems to Streamline 

and Enhance Organizational Operations

Timeliness and Quality

Continued improvements in the timeliness of case disposition further the FLRA’s critical role in 

facilitating orderly, effective, and efficient change within the Federal Government. In large part, 

the FLRA exists to promote effective labor-management relations that, in turn, permit improved 

employee performance and Government operations. Timely resolution – or avoidance – of FLRA 

cases is critical to this endeavor. And effective case resolution includes not only timeliness, but 

also: effective process execution; clear communication with the parties around case processes; and 

the issuance of well-written and understandable decisions that provide deliberate, impartial, and 

legally sound analyses and consideration of the issues in dispute.

The agency facilitates improvements in performance, Government-wide, that have inevitable 

effects on employee working conditions and that implicate the bargaining rights of the more than 

1.2 million employees represented by labor organizations. Unless management and labor can 

collaboratively resolve their disputes and avoid litigation or – failing that – have their 

disagreements adjudicated expeditiously by the FLRA, mission performance will suffer. This is 

particularly relevant now as Federal agencies are making significant adjustments and changes in 

how they perform their missions in response to the budgetary and policy challenges that they are 

facing.

Alternative Dispute Resolution and Education

Throughout the years, the Authority, the OGC, and the FSIP have not only recognized the many 

benefits associated with using ADR to resolve workplace disputes, but they have also integrated 
24

ADR techniques into all aspects of case processing. Put simply, offering ADR services in every 

case, at every step, results in faster, more effective outcomes for the parties and the FLRA. For 

this reason, the agency continues to leverage existing staff and resources to increase its ADR 

reach. This includes partnering with other agencies and entities – such as the Federal Mediation 

and Conciliation Service (FMCS), the Federal Executive Boards, and the General Services 

Administration (GSA) – to train large numbers of practitioners.

In addition, the FLRA’s training initiatives are intended to make case processing more effective 

and efficient, and to better serve the FLRA’s customers by providing meaningful and clear 

guidance on statutory rights and responsibilities. Timely and efficient case processing is furthered 

by FLRA customers being knowledgeable about their rights and obligations under the Statute, as 

well as FLRA case law, regulations, and case-processing procedures. The FLRA delivers its 

educational materials through a variety of means, such as: in-person training sessions; 

comprehensive, web-based training modules; and case outlines, manuals, and subject-matter 

guides that are easily accessible on www.FLRA.gov. All of these materials have been developed 

to assist members of the Federal labor-management-relations community with issues and cases 

arising under the Statute. Using collaboration and ADR techniques – alone or in conjunction with 

other training, outreach, and facilitation services – to assist parties in minimizing or resolving 

labor-management disputes significantly reduces the need for litigation and its attendant costs, and 

it gets the parties back to work accomplishing their missions and delivering effective and efficient 

Government services.

Information Technology (IT)

Consistent with the FLRA’s Strategic Plan, IT and automation of agency processes are key areas 

of focus for the agency. Both are fundamental for ensuring the cost-effectiveness and efficiency 

of the FLRA, as measured by the agency’s ability to meet its annual performance goals. The 

agency continues to improve its overall effectiveness and efficiency, as well as the 

customer-service experience, by engaging in new and innovative ways to conduct business, such 

as through electronic case filing (eFiling). In addition, the agency has placed significant 

emphasis on IT modernization to ensure that its IT equipment and infrastructure enable it to 

maximize gains in efficiency that can be achieved through use of technology.

In FY 2016, the FLRA launched its redesigned website – www.FLRA.gov. This effort, which 

included input from key internal and external stakeholders, was highly collaborative, and it 

engaged employees across all components and offices of the agency to develop improvements in 

the FLRA’s website to promote innovative change in how the FLRA delivers its online 

information and services to customers. The new site is significantly more user friendly, allowing 

visitors to find the information that they need more quickly – with fewer mouse clicks. And it is 

more intuitive through improved organization of content. The new site also provides users with 

integrated access to all FLRA training information and other educational materials in one 

centralized location. And the agency implemented an online tool that allows customers, for the 

first time, to register for all FLRA training events directly through the website, creating 

efficiencies for both customers and FLRA administrative staff, who support the Agency-wide 

performance goal of providing, in FY 2017, 275 training sessions to over 7,000 participants 

annually. 
25

The FLRA will also continue to work towards its long-term goal of implementing end-to-end 

electronic case files throughout the FLRA and complying with the OMB-mandated target of 

having fully electronic files by 2019. Increasing eFiling is critical to achieving this goal. In this 

regard, the more case-related information that the FLRA receives electronically – rather than in 

hard copy – from the outset, the easier it is to convert that information into an electronic case 

file, without the need for FLRA staff to manually scan documents. In recognition of this, the 

agency continues to execute the four-year, four-phase plan that it initially developed and 

launched in FY 2015 to accomplish the transition to fully electronic case files. 

Phase 1 was completion of the implementation of an eFiling System – eFiling 1.0 – for all FLRA 

offices that accept case filings, and the refinement and improvement of that system – based on 

user experience and feedback – through implementation of eFiling 2.0. The FLRA’s eFiling 

System is an important E-Government initiative that was developed to provide easier and more 

user-friendly access to the FLRA and its services. Every FLRA office that receives case filings –

the FSIP, the Authority, the OGC, and the OALJ – is capable of receiving those filings 

electronically. But during Phase 1, the agency recognized that users were slow to adopt the new 

eFiling system, and the agency began actively seeking feedback regarding the eFiling interface 

and its usability. Based on that user feedback, the agency continued in FY 2016 to focus on 

developing, testing, and implementing eFiling 2.0 with a new user interface (in Ruby on Rails) 

that was more intuitive, user-friendly, and visually appealing. 

The new and improved eFiling 2.0 interface also serves as the catalyst for Phase 2, which – using 

the same Ruby on Rails user interface – will provide a similar, more user-friendly and intuitive 

interface for the agency’s electronic Case-Management System. Phase 2 also includes the 

implementation of an agency-wide Document Management System – an electronic, cloud-based 

“filing cabinet” that provides a framework for organizing digital and paper documents. The 

Document Management System will not only replace all existing network drives and folders and 

allow for quick access to any document, file, or email through use of its sophisticated search 

engines, but it will also provide the necessary storage capacity and technological platform for the 

eventual integration of all electronic case-processing systems so that the agency can realize its 

vision of having fully electronic case files. Consistent with its multi-year plan, in FY 2016, the 

FLRA procured a Document Management System – iManage – and it is on track to complete the 

design and implementation of this new IT system by the end of FY 2017. 

 

Phase 3, which is targeted for completion in FY 2018, is the integration of the automated 

connection between the Case Management System, the eFiling System, and the Document 

Management System. And Phase 4 is the complete transition to 100 percent electronic case files 

throughout the agency, with a goal of FY 2019 for completion. 

In addition, the FLRA continues to leverage the Video Teleconferencing (VTC) System 

implemented in FY 2015 and to transition to business cable, gaining efficiencies and cost savings 

in travel and network costs. The VTC System saves agency travel funds and offers alternative 

methods for achieving agency-wide training, outreach, and intervention goals. And with the 

ongoing transition to business cable, the agency is achieving 5 to 10 percent savings annually for 

network services and reinvesting those savings to provide a back-up, secondary system for the 

Regional Office networks. It has also yielded faster connections for the FLRA’s Regional 
26

Offices, increasing network speeds by 50 to 80 percent. Both initiatives are key components in 

the agency’s effort to achieve efficiencies through use of innovative technology. 

Human Capital

The FLRA continues its overall success and improvement as measured by the Federal Employee 

Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), leaving no doubt that the FLRA’s investments in the recruitment, 

retention, and skills and leadership development of its employees continues to produce a highly 

engaged workforce that is dedicated to the accomplishment of its mission. The results of the 

survey reflect the agency’s continuous growth in overall employee satisfaction, as demonstrated 

by the FLRA ranking in FY 2016 as the #1 small agency in two important indices – Employee 

Engagement and New IQ – and the increase in 2016 positive ratings in 19 items from 2015. In 

addition, the FLRA has 66 identified strengths (items with 65 percent or higher positive ratings) 

and no identified challenges (items with 35 percent or higher negative ratings). And the 

agency’s scores are above the Government-wide average in 69 out of 71 questions. Of particular 

note is that: 97 percent of FLRA respondents report that they are held accountable for achieving 

results; 96 percent positively rate the overall quality of the work done by their work unit; 

96 percent indicate that they are willing to put in extra effort to get a job done; 94 percent know 

how their work relates to the agency’s goals and priorities; 94 percent think that the people they 

work with cooperate to get the job done; 94 percent believe that the agency is successful at 

accomplishing its mission; 93 percent find that the workforce has the job-relevant knowledge 

and skills necessary to accomplish organizational goals; 92 percent indicate that their supervisors 

regularly communicate with them about their performance; and 91 percent state that employees 

in their work unit share job knowledge with each other. 

These results show that employees at all levels understand the mission of the FLRA, understand 

their role in achieving the mission, and see themselves as an integral part of achieving 

agency-wide success. The agency continues to credit its mission-performance successes to its 

high level of employee engagement. 

As to the Employee Engagement Index, it is a measure of the conditions conducive to 

engagement – that is, the engagement potential of the agency’s work environment. It is 

composed of three sub-factors: Leaders Lead, Supervisors, and Intrinsic Work Experience. Not 

only is the FLRA the #1 ranked small agency overall, but it is also the top-scoring agency in two 

of the three sub-factors – Leaders Lead and Intrinsic Work Experience. 

And the FLRA’s #1 small-agency ranking in terms of the “New Inclusion Quotient” (New IQ)

Index provides insights into employee perceptions of the inclusiveness of the agency by looking 

at twenty questions that measure the five “Habits of Inclusion” – Fair, Open, Cooperative, 

Supportive, and Empowering. The FLRA is the top-ranking small agency for each of the five 

habits of inclusion, with scores averaging 15 percent – and as much as 21 percent – higher than 

the average scores for all small agencies. 

Consistent with Government-wide diversity and inclusion initiatives, the FLRA uses the FEVS 

to develop and implement a data-driven, forward-looking human-capital-management strategy. 

Focusing on key drivers of employee engagement, the FLRA has developed strategies, including 
27

the New IQ, for employees to build and cultivate key skills that lead to greater individual and 

organizational performance and job satisfaction. In this connection, in FY 2016, the FLRA 

continued to invest in its employees through classroom training, rotational details, 

cross-component learning, challenging assignments, and leadership-development trainings and 

opportunities to enhance and broaden employees’ skills. Employees at all levels – both 

professional and administrative-support staff – delivered positive agency outcomes and led 

numerous mission-related initiatives, including: the development and implementation of the 

FLRA’s eFiling System; the FLRA website redesign; the streamlining of internal caseprocessing procedures; and the development and regular updating of Authority and OGC training 

materials, guides, and manuals – many of which are web-based – to educate the FLRA’s 

customers about the Statute, applicable legal standards and FLRA precedent, and the agency’s 

case-processing procedures.

Again, in FY 2016, internal developmental details have accomplished two strategic 

objectives: (1) development of future leaders to facilitate succession planning; and 

(2) cross-training to allow for the reassignment of employees to positions that are more closely 

matched to their career interests – and to the agency’s needs. Position descriptions have 

continued to be updated and now allow for greater growth and advancement opportunities within 

the agency, and employees readily volunteered for collateral-duty assignments, new initiatives, 

and projects. And, in FY 2016, FLRA employees continued to receive discounted tuition at the 

University of Maryland University College (UMUC) for self-directed study pursuant to a 

memorandum of understanding between the agency and UMUC.

In order to further fulfill the FLRA’s mission, the agency focuses on succession planning by 

identifying its future human-resources needs, potential organizational and skills gaps, and 

vulnerabilities, and then setting goals to address them. With respect to succession planning, in 

FY 2016, the FLRA continued a training initiative designed to assist senior, high-potential 

employees identify and strengthen critical leadership skills in preparation for eventually 

transitioning to formal leadership positions. To strengthen and support the FLRA’s new cadre of 

first-time managers and supervisors, the agency identified a series of trainings geared towards 

developing strategic thinking and other critical skills in preparation for effective leadership at the 

FLRA. And the FLRA continued to develop and provide high-level, mission-based training for 

its attorneys – nearly 20 percent of whom are new to the FLRA – that built upon their existing 

legal, technical, and ADR skills to improve and maximize performance. These training 

initiatives crossed components, bringing together future agency leaders from all offices to 

enhance their skills and encourage ongoing collaboration among peers. 

The FLRA continued to engage its workforce around improving work processes, resulting in the 

FLRA’s continual climb in its “Innovation” rankings. The innovation category measures 

employee perceptions of efforts to improve the way work is done, including their own personal 

motivation to promote change, and the support and rewards that they receive for promoting new 

ideas. The FLRA’s commitment to rewarding creativity and provision of forums for employees 

to share and promote learning and coordination between components and offices have clearly 

demonstrated that learning more about the work going on across the agency sparks creativity and 

collaboration. These efforts have produced real results.
28

For example, during FY 2016, the Authority component engaged its employees in the 

development and implementation of a pilot program for the electronic circulation of 

Member-office decisions and votes on pending cases. As a result of the pilot, the Authority will 

no longer physically circulate hard or paper copies of all decisions and votes. Not only did this 

process improvement result in increased efficiencies, it facilitated increased staff telework and 

awareness of pending issues by providing them the opportunity to review all circulating 

decisions. In addition, it began the transition to an increasingly electronic “case-file universe,” 

in anticipation of the FLRA’s electronic-case-file initiative. 

The FLRA is committed to fostering a workplace where employees from all backgrounds are 

recruited, retained, and developed for successful performance and career progression. Since 

FY 2014, and continuing throughout FY 2016, the agency achieved greater diversity in its 

workforce by increasing strategic and targeted recruitment and posting job opportunities with 

career-planning and placement services, local colleges and universities, and professional 

affinity-group organizations. And the FLRA has consistently used data to help identify and 

eliminate barriers to recruiting and hiring the diverse talent that it needs. In this respect, the 

FLRA’s ongoing focus on increasing ethnic and gender diversity in its Senior Executive Service 

corps yielded small, but meaningful, gains in FY 2016. The FLRA also continued to utilize both 

Student Pathways and summer-externship programs to accomplish mission-related initiatives 

throughout the agency. Finally, serving as one of three Small Agency Council (SAC) 

representatives on the Diversity and Inclusion in Government Council (DIG), the FLRA is 

participating in Government-wide discussions aimed to create and foster a Federal workforce 

that includes and engages Federal employees and reflects all segments of society. 
29

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: WE WILL RESOLVE DISPUTES UNDER THE 

STATUTE IN A TIMELY, HIGH-QUALITY, AND IMPARTIAL MANNER

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.1: PRODUCE TIMELY REVIEW AND 

DISPOSITION OF UNFAIR-LABOR-PRACTICE CASES.

The General Counsel has independent responsibility for the investigation, settlement, and 

prosecution of ULP charges. ULP cases originate with the filing of a charge in a Regional Office 

by an employee, a labor organization, or an agency. Once a charge has been filed, the Regional 

Office will investigate the charge to determine whether it has merit. If the Regional Director 

determines that the charge has merit, then he or she will, absent settlement, issue and prosecute a 

complaint before an ALJ. If the Regional Director determines that the charge lacks merit, then 

the charging party is entitled to a written explanation, and, if not satisfied, may appeal that 

decision to the General Counsel in Washington, D.C. If the General Counsel upholds the 

dismissal, then the case is closed. The Authority has appointed ALJs to hear ULP cases 

prosecuted by the General Counsel. The OALJ transmits recommended decisions of the ALJs to 

the Authority, which may affirm, modify, or reverse them in whole or in part on exceptions. If 

no exceptions are filed to an ALJ’s decision, then the Authority adopts the decision without 

precedential significance. 

OGC 2013 2014 2015 2016 

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 1,488 1,570 1,425 1,178 1,333 963

Charges filed 4,659 4,696 4,418 4,345 4,000 4,000

Total caseload 6,147 6,266 5,843 5,523 5,333 4,963

Charges withdrawn/settled 3,646 3,779 3,662 3,268 3,400 3,100

Charges dismissed 673 809 800 749 790 720

Complaints issued 258 253 203 173 180 180

Total cases closed 4,577 4,841 4,665 4,190 4,370 4,000

Cases pending, end of year 1,570 1,425 1,178 1,333 963 963

OALJ 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 115 120 105 62 60 40

Cases received from the OGC 271 260 222 179 200 200

Total caseload 386 380 327 241 260 240

Settlements before hearing 223 245 187 130 200 200

Cases closed by decision 43 30 78 51 20 14

Total cases closed 266 275 265 181 220 214

Cases pending, end of year 120 105 62 60 40 26
30

Authority 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017 

Est.

20187 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 2 12 13 24 24 24

Exceptions filed 27 27 62 45 32 32

Total caseload 29 39 75 69 56 56

Cases closed procedurally 16 18 37 51 28 28

Cases closed based on merits 1 8 14 14 4 4

Total cases closed 17 26 51 51 32 32

Cases pending, end of year 12 13 24 24 24 24

Measure 1.1: The percentage of ULP charges resolved by the OGC by complaint, withdrawal, 

dismissal, or settlement within 120 days of filing of the charge. 

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

68% 67% 72% 71% 74% 70%

Measure 1.2: The percentage of decisions on an appeal of a Regional Director’s dismissal of a 

ULP charge issued within 60 days of the date filed, and in no case more than 120 days.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100%/100% 98%/100% 98%/100% 100%/100% 95%/100% 95%/100%

Measure 1.3: The percentage of ULP complaints issued by the General Counsel resolved or 

decided in the OALJ within 180 days of the complaint being issued.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

86% 91% 77%

Measure 1.3: The percentage of ULP complaints issued by the General Counsel decided in the 

OALJ within 180 days of the complaint being issued.*

Results Targets *Clarified measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

80% 90% 80%
31

Measure 1.4: The percentage of ULP cases decided within 180 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

100% 50% 57% 89%

Measure 1.4: The percentage of ULP cases decided within 150 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

75% 75%

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.1: RESOLVE OVERAGE 

UNFAIR-LABOR-PRACTICE CASES IN A TIMELY FASHION.

As part of its 2015-2018 Strategic Plan, the FLRA developed new performance measures for 

FY 2016 and FY 2017 to ensure that cases in which the primary timeliness goal is not met are 

sufficiently targeted and do not go significantly overage. 

Measure 2.1: The percentage of ULP charges resolved by the OGC by complaint, withdrawal, 

dismissal, or settlement within 240 days of filing of the charge.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 98% 95%

Measure 2.2: The percentage of ULP complaints issued by the General Counsel decided in the 

OALJ within 365 days of the complaint being issued.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

89% 98% 98%

Measure 2.3: The percentage of ULP cases decided within 365 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.*

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 95%
32

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.2: PRODUCE TIMELY REVIEW AND 

DISPOSITION OF REPRESENTATION CASES.

The Statute sets out a specific procedure for employees to petition to be represented by a labor 

union and to determine which employees will be included in a “bargaining unit” that a union 

represents. Implementing this procedure, the FLRA conducts secret-ballot elections for union 

representation and resolves a variety of issues related to questions of union representation of 

employees. These issues include, for example, whether particular employees are managers or 

“confidential” employees excluded from union representation, whether there has been election 

misconduct on the part of agencies or unions, and whether changes in union and agency 

organizations affect existing bargaining units. Representation cases are initiated when an 

individual, a labor organization, or an agency files a petition with a Regional Office. After a 

petition is filed, the Regional Director conducts an investigation to determine the appropriateness 

of a unit or other matter related to the petition. After concluding such investigation, the Regional 

Director may conduct a secret-ballot election or hold a hearing to resolve disputed factual 

matters. After a hearing, the Regional Director issues a Decision and Order, which is final 

unless an application for review is filed with the Authority.

OGC 2013 2014 2015 2016 

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 89 89 65 70 112 117

Petitions filed 253 235 225 265 225 225

Total caseload 342 324 290 335 337 342

Petitions withdrawn 106 118 95 112 105 105

Cases closed based on merits 147 141 125 111 115 115

Total cases closed 253 259 220 223 220 220

Cases pending, end of year 89 65 70 112 117 122

Authority 2013 2014 2015 2016 

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 0 9 7 2 0 0

Applications for review 11 13 16 6 7 7

Total caseload 11 22 23 8 7 7

Cases closed procedurally 1 2 2 0 0 0

Cases closed based on merits 1 13 19 8 7 7

Total cases closed 2 15 21 8 7 0

Cases pending, end of year 9 7 2 0 0 0
33

Measure 1.5: The percentage of representation cases resolved by the OGC through 

withdrawal, election, or issuance of a Decision and Order within 120 days of the filing of a 

petition.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

60% 66% 72% 73% 70% 70%

Measure 1.6: The percentage of representation cases in which the Authority issued a decision 

whether to grant review within 60 days of the filing of an application for review.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.2: RESOLVE OVERAGE REPRESENTATION 

CASES IN A TIMELY FASHION.

As part of its 2015-2018 Strategic Plan, the FLRA developed new performance measures for 

FY 2016 and FY 2017 to ensure that cases in which the primary timeliness goal is not met are 

sufficiently targeted and do not go significantly overage.

Measure 2.3: The percentage of representation cases resolved by the OGC through 

withdrawal, election, or issuance of a Decision and Order within 365 days of the filing of a 

petition.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

98% 98% 95%

Measure 2.4: The percentage of representation cases in which the Authority grants review, 

where the Authority will issue a decision on review, or reach other final resolution of the case, 

within 365 days of the filing of the application for review.*

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 95%
34

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.3: PRODUCE TIMELY REVIEW AND 

DISPOSITION OF ARBITRATION CASES.

Either party to grievance arbitration may file with the Authority an exception to (or an appeal of) 

an arbitrator’s award. The Authority will review an arbitrator’s award to which an exception has 

been filed to determine whether the award is deficient because it is contrary to any law, rule, or 

regulation, or on grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private-sector, labormanagement relations.

Authority 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 40 123 90 50 40 62

Exceptions filed 124 89 99 86 110 110

Total caseload 164 212 189 136 150 172

Cases closed procedurally 19 16 15 21 20 20

Cases closed based on merits 22 106 124 75 68 68

Total cases closed 41 122 139 96 88 88

Cases pending, end of year 123 90 50 40 62 84

Measure 1.7: The percentage of arbitration cases decided within 180 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

91% 34% 40% 79%

Measure 1.7: The percentage of arbitration cases decided within 150 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

75% 75%
35

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.3: RESOLVE OVERAGE ARBITRATION 

CASES IN A TIMELY FASHION.

As part of its 2015-2018 Strategic Plan, the FLRA developed new performance measures for 

FY 2016 and FY 2017 to ensure that cases in which the primary timeliness goal is not met are 

sufficiently targeted and do not go significantly overage.

Measure 2.5: The percentage of arbitration cases decided within 365 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 95%

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.4: PRODUCE TIMELY REVIEW AND 

DISPOSITION OF NEGOTIABILITY CASES.

A Federal agency bargaining with a union may claim that a particular union proposal cannot be 

bargained because it conflicts with Federal law, a Government-wide rule or regulation, or an 

agency regulation for which there is a compelling need. In both of these situations, a union may 

petition the Authority to resolve the negotiability dispute. In addition, agency heads may 

disapprove collective-bargaining agreements if those agreements are contrary to law, and a union 

may petition the Authority to resolve the negotiability dispute. 

Authority 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017 

Est.

2018 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 8 9 17 23 27 0

Petitions filed 30 43 54 55 42 42

Total caseload 38 52 71 78 69 42

Cases closed procedurally 27 29 40 47 67 40

Cases closed based on merits 2 6 8 4 2 2

Total cases closed 29 35 48 51 69 42

Cases pending, end of year 9 17 23 27 0 0
36

Measure 1.8: The percentage of negotiability cases decided within 180 days of assignment to 

an Authority Member.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

80% 60% 50% 75%

Measure 1.8: The percentage of negotiability cases decided within 150 days of assignment to 

an Authority Member.

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

75% 75%

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.4: RESOLVE OVERAGE NEGOTIABILITY 

CASES IN A TIMELY FASHION.

As part of its 2015-2018 Strategic Plan, the FLRA developed new performance measures for 

FY 2016 and FY 2017 to ensure that cases in which the primary timeliness goal is not met are 

sufficiently targeted and do not go significantly overage.

Measure 2.6: The percentage of negotiability cases decided within 365 days of assignment to 

an Authority Member.*

Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2017

FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 95%

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.5: PRODUCE TIMELY REVIEW AND 

DISPOSITION OF BARGAINING-IMPASSE CASES.

In carrying out the right to bargain collectively, it is not uncommon for a union representative 

and a Federal agency to simply not agree on certain issues, and for the bargaining to reach an 

impasse. Several options are available by which the parties may attempt to resolve the impasse. 

The parties may: decide, on their own, to use certain techniques to resolve the impasse, but may 

proceed to private, binding arbitration only after the FSIP approves the procedure; seek the 

services and assistance of the FMCS; or seek the assistance of the FSIP in resolving the 

negotiation impasse, but only after the previous options have failed.
37

FSIP 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017

Est.

2018

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 38 40 28 33 41 40

Impasses filed 194 134 139 142 130 130

Total caseload 232 174 167 175 171 170

Cases closed 192 146 134 134 131 131

Cases pending, end of year 40 28 33 41 40 39

Measure 1.9: The percentage of bargaining-impasse cases in which jurisdiction is declined 

closed within 140 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

95% 89% 100% 100% 80% 80%

Measure 1.10: The percentage of bargaining-impasse cases voluntarily settled after 

jurisdiction has been asserted within 160 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

97% 68% 100% 100% 70% 70%

Measure 1.11: The percentage of bargaining-impasse cases resolved through a final action 

closed within 200 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

87% 61% 100% 100% 70% 70%
38

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: WE WILL PROMOTE STABILITY IN THE 

FEDERAL LABOR-MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING 

LEADERSHIP AND GUIDANCE THROUGH ADR AND EDUCATION

Key to the FLRA’s ADR objectives is to offer high-quality outreach and preventive services, as 

well as resources, to promote more effective labor-management relations across the Federal 

Government. In furtherance of that objective, the FLRA has integrated ADR and consensus 

decision-making into virtually all of its processes, and it has significantly expanded its training, 

outreach, and facilitation activities. ADR is an informal process that allows parties to discuss 

and develop their interests in order to resolve the underlying issues and problems in their 

relationships. This includes interest-based conflict resolution and intervention services in 

pending ULP cases, representation cases, arbitration cases, negotiability appeals, and 

bargaining-impasse disputes. The agency also provides facilitation and training to help labor and 

management develop collaborative relationships. Many of the FLRA’s training programs are 

now available as web-based training modules, bringing educational tools and resources directly 

to agency customers at their desks to further assist them in resolving labor-management disputes. 

The FLRA’s goals include delivering outreach, training, and facilitation services that 

significantly contribute to the mission of the FLRA, and ensuring that training participants 

evaluate FLRA training as highly effective. 

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.1: PROVIDE TARGETED ACCESS TO 

TRAINING, OUTREACH, AND FACILITATION ACTIVITIES WITHIN 

THE LABOR-MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY.

Measure 1.1: The number of training, outreach, and facilitation activities conducted.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

302 225 306 280 275 275

Measure 1.2: The number of participants involved in training, outreach, and facilitation 

activities.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

5,976 5,114 8,294 8,440 7,000 7,000
39

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.1: SUCCESSFULLY RESOLVE A 

SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF FLRA CASES THROUGH ADR.

The FLRA has integrated ADR and consensus decision-making into virtually all of its case 

processes, and it has significantly expanded its training, outreach, and facilitation activities since 

FY 2011. ADR is an informal process that allows parties to discuss and develop their interests in 

order to resolve the underlying issues and problems in their relationships. This includes interestbased conflict resolution and intervention services in pending ULP cases, representation cases, 

arbitration cases, negotiability appeals, and bargaining-impasse disputes. The agency also 

provides facilitation and training to help labor and management develop collaborative 

relationships. Many of the FLRA’s training programs are now available as web-based training 

modules, bringing educational tools and resources directly to agency customers at their desks to 

further assist them in resolving labor-management disputes.

Measure 2.1: The percentage of ULP cases in the OGC in which an offer of ADR services is 

accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

98% 98% 96% 98% 95% 95%

Measure 2.2: The percentage of ULP cases in the OALJ in which an offer of 

Settlement-Judge services is accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

78% 96% 87% 74% 85% 85%

Measure 2.3: The percentage of representation cases in the OGC in which an offer of ADR 

services is accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100% 100% 96% 100% 95% 95%

Measure 2.4: The percentage of appropriate ULP cases in the Authority in which ADR 

services are offered.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

N/A 80% 80%
40

Measure 2.5: The percentage of ULP cases in the Authority in which ADR services are 

provided that are partially or totally resolved.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

N/A 85% 85%

Measure 2.6: The percentage of appropriate arbitration cases in which ADR services are 

offered.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

N/A 55% 55%

Measure 2.7: The percentage of arbitration cases in which an offer of ADR services is 

accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100% 80% 43% 79% 75% 75%

Measure 2.8: The percentage of appropriate negotiability cases in which ADR services are 

offered.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100% 100% 100%

Measure 2.9: The percentage of proposals or provisions – in negotiability cases in which an 

offer of ADR services is accepted by the parties – that are partially or totally resolved.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

100% 100% 100%

Measure 2.9: The percentage of negotiability cases in which ADR services are provided that 

are partially or totally resolved.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

100% 90% 90%
41

Measure 2.10: The percentage of bargaining-impasse cases in which an offer of ADR services 

is accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

28% 27% 39%

Measure 2.10: The percentage of bargaining-impasse cases in which parties’ disputes are 

totally resolved voluntarily.*

Results Targets *New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

27% 30% 30%

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: WE WILL MANAGE OUR RESOURCES 

EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE 

ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE

The FLRA’s ability to fulfill its core mission under the Statute depends on excellent management 

of the organization and its resources. The organizational-excellence goal emphasizes how the 

agency’s employees, IT infrastructure, and allocation of resources are central to achieving all of 

the strategic goals and objectives outlined in the strategic plan. 

The landscape of the Federal workplace and workforce continues to evolve, as do the needs of 

the parties that the FLRA serves. Approximately 40 percent of the FLRA’s workforce has been 

with the agency for five years or less, and many of the agency’s most experienced employees are 

currently eligible to retire. In light of these facts, it is crucial for the FLRA to simultaneously 

focus on developing the workforce of the future, while retaining valuable institutional 

knowledge. 

The agency is prepared to meet ever-changing business demands through the innovative use of 

IT to best manage the workload and interact with parties. The FLRA continues to be an effective 

steward of taxpayer dollars, with a renewed focus on maximizing the use of data to inform 

decision making. The agency’s future operational approaches are designed to foster nimble and 

seamless deployment of resources coupled with cost-avoidance strategies to support productive 

labor-management relations across the Federal Government. And, consistent with the PMA, the 

FLRA has a comprehensive, forward-looking plan to increase quality and value in its 

administrative functions, continue efforts to enhance productivity and achieve cost savings, 

unlock the full potential of its workforce, and build the FLRA’s workplace and workforce for the 

future.
42

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.1: RECRUIT, RETAIN, AND DEVELOP A 

HIGHLY TALENTED, MOTIVATED, AND DIVERSE WORKFORCE TO 

ACCOMPLISH THE FLRA’S MISSION.

Over the last seven and a half years, the FLRA has demonstrated significant and marked 

improvement in its performance and service delivery, and it has continued to rank among the top 

ten small agencies in the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government Survey. These results 

demonstrate the agency’s commitment to empowering and developing a highly engaged and 

effective workforce. The success of FLRA employees is instrumental to its success as an 

agency. It is within this spirit that the FLRA actively manages its human-capital programs.

Measure 1.1: Program managers ensure that the right employees are in the right place to 

achieve results.

FY 2013 Results

Implemented a web-based T&A system to increase efficiency and 

accuracy of reporting. Obtained provisional certification of the 

FLRA’s SES Performance-Management System from OPM. 

Established an ADR process for resolving performancemanagement issues. As part of its strategic workforce planning 

efforts, continued employee development, including attorney 

details to other offices; ADR-facilitator training; and 

leadership-development and other workforce training. 

Established a Student Pathways Policy for student internships 

and partnered with the University of Maryland’s Federal 

Semester Program to offer unpaid internships to students.

FY 2014 Results

Focused on succession planning by increasing targeted attorney 

recruitment. Renewed agreement with the University of 

Maryland for discounted tuition for agency employees. Increased 

agency resources through recruitment, staffing, and placement. 

Utilized the Student Pathways and Summer Externship programs 

to increase resources for casework and administrative initiatives 

throughout the agency. Realigned functions within the agency’s 

Office of the Executive Director to allow for improved 

efficiencies and customer service to agency employees. Worked 

extensively with managers to hold employees accountable for 

performance and development. Updated Attorney Recruitment 

Policy in order to allow managers greater hiring flexibility of the 

agency’s mission-critical occupation and to streamline the 

recruitment process. In collaboration with the Partnership for 

Public Service’s Excellence in Government Fellows program, 

developed and piloted an Employee Onboarding Handbook to 

improve the onboarding process and increase employee 

engagement.

FY 2015 Results

Implemented a fully automated and integrated electronic system 

for personnel actions. Developed a more robust onboarding 

process through increased use of technology and piloted 

implementation of an Employee Onboarding Handbook. 
43

Updated certain human-resources policies and procedures. 

Continued to build internal capacity for handling the major 

human-resources functional areas. Position descriptions 

continued to be updated and now allow for greater growth and 

advancement opportunities within the agency, and employees 

readily volunteered for collateral-duty assignments, new 

initiatives, and projects. The agency also renewed its agreement 

with a local university to offer discounted tuition to FLRA 

employees for self-directed study. Improved office customer 

service by improving the quality of advice provided to managers 

and employees. Worked with managers to educate them about 

and increase diversity and inclusion when seeking new agency 

talent. The agency achieved greater diversity in its workforce in 

FY 2015 by increasing strategic and targeted recruitment and 

posting job opportunities with career-planning and placement 

services, local colleges and universities, and professional affinitygroup organizations. With respect to succession planning, the 

FLRA continued to offer cross-component developmental details 

and its training initiative designed to assist higher-graded 

employees identify and strengthen critical leadership skills in 

preparation for eventually transitioning to formal leadership 

positions. To strengthen and support the FLRA’s new cadre of 

first-time managers and supervisors, the agency identified a 

series of trainings geared towards developing strategic thinking 

and other critical skills in preparation for executive leadership at 

the FLRA. These training initiatives crossed components, 

bringing together future agency leaders from all offices to 

enhance their skills and encourage collaboration among peers. 

Measure 1.1: Demonstrate strong recruitment and retention practices.

*New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 Results

Strengthened the agency’s diversity and inclusion recruitment 

efforts, establishing and implementing a process for sharing job 

announcements with relevant affinity groups. The FLRA is 

continuing to enhance its strategic and targeted recruitment and 

posting job opportunities with career-planning and placement 

services, local colleges and universities, and professional affinitygroup organizations. The FLRA is also using data to help 

identify and eliminate barriers to recruiting and hiring the diverse 

talent that it needs. 

The FLRA is working to strengthen its operational offices, 

seeking feedback through semi-annual and point-of-service 

surveys. Efforts are underway to revise and implement a robust 

agency-wide onboarding program, which will include briefings 
44

and continuing educational opportunities for employees to 

strengthen their knowledge of the FLRA.

The FLRA strengthened its recognition and promotion of 

cultural-based celebrations, establishing an employee-driven 

initiative to develop and promote events and activities. The

FLRA targeted efforts to educate managers about, and increase 

diversity and inclusion when, seeking new agency talent, and it 

continued efforts to train agency staff at all levels on key 

diversity and inclusion issues. And manager performance plans 

have been revised to include diversity-and- inclusion-focused 

metrics. Much of the FLRA’s success is reflected in its #1 smallagency ranking in terms of the “New IQ” Index, which provides 

insights into employee perceptions of the inclusiveness of the 

agency by looking at twenty questions that measure the five 

“Habits of Inclusion” – Fair, Open, Cooperative, Supportive, and 

Empowering. The FLRA is the top-ranking small-agency for 

each of the five habits of inclusion, with scores averaging 15 

percent – and as much as 21 percent – higher than the average 

scores for all small agencies. And in the 2015 Best Places to 

Work in the Federal Government rankings, the FLRA was ranked 

#2 out of 28 small agencies in its support for diversity. 

FY 2017 Target

Achieve 90 percent positive scores on internal survey questions 

that relate to work-life balance.

Retain 85 percent of employees who joined the FLRA since 2014 

at the agency for five years.

FY 2018 Target

Maintain 90 percent positive scores on internal survey questions 

that relate to work-life balance.

Continue to retain 85 percent of employees who joined the FLRA 

since 2014 at the agency for five years.

Measure 1.2: Maintain and grow agency expertise through employee development.

*New measure beginning in FY 2016

FY 2016 Results

Successfully implemented numerous cross-component 

developmental opportunities for employees, including workgroups 

to encourage innovation, the development and delivery of 

training, and more than ten detail opportunities at all levels and 

offices within the agency. 

Continued its robust training initiative focusing on leadership and 

skills development. It addressed temporary mission needs, 

maximizing Student Pathways and student-internship programs, 
45

and utilizing developmental details within its existing workforce. 

All new managers and supervisors were provided with leadershiptraining opportunities, and the FLRA’s executive-training plans 

are ongoing and are aimed at developing executive-level talent 

among the FLRA’s existing workforce. 

Continued its overall success and improvement as measured by 

the FEVS, leaving no doubt that the FLRA continues to have a 

highly engaged workforce that is dedicated to the accomplishment 

of its mission. The results of the survey reflect the agency’s 

continuous growth in overall employee satisfaction, as 

demonstrated by the FLRA ranking as the #1 small agency in two 

important indices – Employee Engagement and New IQ – and the 

increase in 2016 positive ratings in 19 items from 2015. In 

addition, the FLRA has 66 identified strengths (items with 

65 percent or higher positive ratings) and no identified challenges 

(items with 35 percent or higher negative ratings). And the

agency’s scores are above the Government-wide average in 69 out 

of 71 questions. Of particular note is that: 97 percent of FLRA 

respondents report that they are held accountable for achieving 

results; 96 percent positively rate the overall quality of the work 

done by their work unit; 96 percent indicate that they are willing 

to put in extra effort to get a job done; 94 percent know how their 

work relates to the agency’s goals and priorities; 94 percent think 

that the people they work with cooperate to get the job done; 

94 percent believe that the agency is successful at accomplishing 

its mission; 93 percent find that the workforce has the job-relevant 

knowledge and skills necessary to accomplish organizational 

goals; 92 percent indicate that their supervisors regularly 

communicate with them about their performance; and 91 percent 

state that employees in their work unit share job knowledge with 

each other. Moreover, the agency maintained its sustained growth 

of positive responses to the question “supervisors in my work unit 

support employee development” – increasing by nearly 

9.5 percent over 2015.

FY 2017 Target

Building on the agency’s evolving succession plan – which is 

designed to lessen the impact of institutional-knowledge loss as 

employees retire or leave and to maximize current talent 

utilization by closing leadership staffing and competency 

gaps/deficiencies – develop a formal agency developmental-detail 

program, establishing cross-component detail opportunities to 

provide employees with training and developmental experiences 

that will enhance their skills and increase their understanding of 

the agency’s mission and operations across program lines, as well 

as the relevance of their work to the mission and programs of the 

FLRA. 
46

Managers will assess annually 100 percent of employees on their 

developmental needs and provide at least one targeted 

developmental opportunity to each of their staff members per 

year.

Maintain sustained growth of positive responses to the OPM 

FEVS question “supervisors in my work unit support employee 

development.”

FY 2018 Target

Implement a formal cross-component detail program. 

Managers will assess annually 100 percent of employees on their 

developmental needs and provide at least one targeted 

developmental opportunity to each of their staff members per 

year.

Maintain sustained growth of positive responses to the OPM 

FEVS question “supervisors in my work unit support employee 

development.”

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.1: IMPROVE USE OF EXISTING 

TECHNOLOGY AND DEPLOY NEW IT SYSTEMS TO STREAMLINE 

AND ENHANCE ORGANIZATIONAL OPERATIONS.

The FLRA began accepting eFilings in FY 2013, and, as of FY 2015, eFiling is available for all 

FLRA offices that receive case filings. The FLRA is continuing to work towards implementing 

the agency’s long-term goal of sharing end-to-end electronic case files throughout the FLRA, as 

well as the OMB-mandated target of having fully electronic files by 2019. Increasing eFiling is 

critical to achieving this goal. In this regard, the more case-related information that the FLRA 

receives electronically – rather than in hard copy – from the outset, the easier it is to convert that 

information into an electronic case file, without the need for FLRA staff to manually scan 

documents. In recognition of this, in FY 2015, the agency developed and launched a plan to 

accomplish the transition to fully electronic case files in 4 agile phases over 4 years. 

Measure 2.1: Expand the use of eFiling.

Results

FY 2013 10% of cases eFiled. 

FY 2014 12% of cases eFiled.

FY 2015 17% of cases eFiled.

FY 2016 22% of cases eFiled.

Targets

FY 2017 50% of cases eFiled.
47

FY 2018 75% of cases eFiled.

Measure 2.2: Electronic end-to-end case processing.

Results

FY 2013 Conducted a pilot program on end-to-end case processing.

FY 2014 Migrated the CADRO to an end-to-end electronic case file.

FY 2015

Made eFiling available for OALJ cases, resulting in eFiling being available 

for all offices that accept case filings. As a result, completed full integration 

of the CMS and eFiling systems, enabling end-to-end electronic case 

processing throughout the agency. 

FY 2016

With the full completion of the eFiling objective, the CMS has the structure in 

place to receive and store electronically filed cases. The applications have 

been merged, creating bridges between the two systems, to support end-toend electronic case-processing capability. The FLRA neared completion of 

improving the eFiling user interface, which builds upon the existing system,

making the eFiling system more user-friendly and intuitive. And efforts are 

underway to implement a Document Management System. This effort will 

span into FY 2017, and it is a critical step in accomplishing the FLRA’s 

multi-year electronic-case-file plan.

Targets

FY 2017

Incorporating internal and external customer feedback, complete 

implementation of improvements to the eFiling user interface in order to 

increase use of eFiling. 

Lay the foundation for modernizing the infrastructure for the agency’s 

electronic CMS and eFiling by transitioning to a new backend product that 

will allow for a more user friendly and complete integration of the CMS, the 

eFiling system, and the Document Management System. 

Complete the initial deployment of an agency-wide, cloud-based Document 

Management System, replacing the current network shares with an integrated 

document and email communications system that will facilitate document 

sharing and electronic case-processing initiatives. 

FY 2018

Integrate the CMS and eFiling systems with the agency Document 

Management System, enabling end-to-end electronic case processing 

throughout the agency. 
1

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

1400 K Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20424

www.flra.gov