Thirty-six 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 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

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

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

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

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN....................................................................11

Strategic and Performance Planning Framework ..........................................................................11

Goal 1: Provide Timely Review and Disposition of Unfair-Labor-Practice Cases......................16

Goal 2: Provide Timely Review and Disposition of Representation Cases..................................18

Goal 3: Provide Timely Review and Disposition of Arbitration Cases........................................19

Goal 4: Provide Timely Review and Disposition of Negotiability Cases ....................................20

Goal 5: Provide Timely Review and Disposition of Bargaining-Impasse Cases .........................21

Goal 6: Use Collaboration Techniques and Alternative-Dispute-Resolution Services to

Minimize and/or Resolve Labor-Management Disputes................................................22

Goal 7: Modernize Agency Information-Technology-Business Systems to Support and

Enhance Program Achievement......................................................................................24

Goal 8: Develop, Manage, and Utilize the FLRA’s Human Capital to Meet Program Needs.....25

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................28

FY 2016 Appropriation Language .................................................................................................28

Appropriation Request...................................................................................................................28

Change from FY 2015 ...................................................................................................................29

Program and Financing Schedule ..................................................................................................32

Object Classification Schedule ......................................................................................................33

Employment Summary Schedule...................................................................................................33

Inspector General Resources..........................................................................................................34
1

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 Congress to create the FLRA as an independent 

agency.

The Statute 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. These rights 

include acting for a labor organization as a representative and, in that capacity, presenting the 

views of the organization. Employees also have the right to engage in collective bargaining with 

respect to conditions of employment through representatives chosen by the employees.

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

federal government by resolving and assisting in the prevention of labor-management 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 

and quality resolution of labor-management disputes – is essential for program performance 

government-wide. If a labor-management dispute remains unresolved for too long, then mission 

accomplishment at the affected agencies likely will suffer.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The FLRA consists of the Authority, the Office of the General Counsel, and the Federal Service 

Impasses Panel. The agency also provides full staff support to two other organizations, the 

Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and the Foreign Service Labor Relations Board.
2

The Authority

The Authority is composed of three full-time Members appointed by the President with the 

advice and consent of the Senate. The Members are appointed for fixed, five-year, staggered 

terms, and one Member is designated by the President to serve as Chairman. The Chairman acts 

as the agency’s chief executive and administrative officer. The Authority is empowered to: 

resolve disputes over the negotiability of proposals made in collective bargaining; decide 

whether conduct alleged in a complaint constitutes an unfair labor practice (ULP); resolve 

exceptions to grievance-arbitration awards; and review decisions of Regional Directors in 

representation disputes over union elections and unit determinations.

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 Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ) also provides settlement opportunities in 

all ULP cases. Decisions of the ALJs may be appealed to the Authority.

The Office of the Solicitor represents the FLRA in court proceedings before all United States 

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 
3

for 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 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 Office of the General Counsel (OGC), including those in the FLRA’s Regional 

Offices (the field). Approximately 50 percent of the FLRA’s staff is employed in the field, 

where all ULP charges and representation petitions are filed. 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 alternative dispute resolution (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.
4

The Federal Service Impasses Panel

The Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP or the Panel) 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 Chairman and six other Members of the Panel are appointed by the 

President 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 Panel may determine to assert jurisdiction 

over the request. If jurisdiction is asserted, then the FSIP has the authority to recommend or 

direct the use of various ADR procedures. These include informal conferences, additional 

mediation, fact-finding, written submissions, and mediation-arbitration by Panel Members, the 

Panel’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. The merits of the FSIP’s decision may not be 

appealed to any court.

AGENCY TRENDS AND CHALLENGES

The FLRA’s mission is to promptly and fairly resolve disputes that are voluntarily filed under 

the Statute by agencies, labor organizations, and individuals. Accomplishing its mission in an 

effective and efficient manner is key 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, consistent with President Obama’s management agenda to deliver a smarter, 

more innovative, and more accountable government.

Atlanta Regional 

Office

Boston Regional 

Office

Chicago Regional 

Office

Dallas Regional 

Office

Denver Regional 

Office

San Francisco 

Regional Office

Washington DC 

Regional Office
5

For the past two fiscal years, the FLRA has been faced with significant obstacles to overcome in 

meeting its mission requirements. In FY 2013, the agency experienced a wave of employee 

retirements, but was unable to backfill the positions due to sequestration, leaving well over ten

percent of its workforce vacant to start FY 2014. Further, the Authority lacked a quorum of 

Members necessary to issue decisions from January 2013 until November 2013, resulting in a 

backlog of Authority cases awaiting decision when the quorum was re-established. But, in large 

part, those obstacles were overcome. Although the backlog in the Authority component has not 

been eliminated, the Authority is committed to doing so by the end of FY 2015, and has 

implemented a case-issuance strategy (an action plan) to accomplish this.

With respect to its mission accomplishments, the FLRA continued its significant improvement 

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

dispute-resolution services. As a result of a comprehensive review of arbitration case 

processing, the Authority implemented regulatory changes in FY 2010 involving those 

cases. The changes were necessary to reduce the number of procedural deficiencies in the 

parties’ filings, and to clarify for its customers the grounds for the Authority’s review and the 

applicable legal standards. Along with the regulatory changes, the Authority developed a Guide 

to Arbitration Under the Statute, which it has continued to update annually, as well as a 

comprehensive, arbitration-training program, which the Authority has delivered on an ongoing 

basis. There have been real performance-improvement outcomes from these initiatives. 

Arbitration cases are now processed and resolved more expeditiously. And continuing to update 

the guide and the training materials are expected to yield dividends far into the future. In 

addition to arbitration, in FY 2013, the Authority developed a Guide to Negotiability Under the

Statute, and an accompanying, comprehensive, negotiability-training program, which it has 

delivered on an ongoing basis. As with the arbitration initiatives, the development of the guide

and the provision of training have yielded real performance-improvement outcomes – the parties 

are better educated about the Authority’s negotiability law and case-processing requirements, 

which has resulted in a reduction in procedurally deficient filings and higher-quality 

better-drafted briefs – which should enable the Authority to more expeditiously process those 

cases.

The OGC’s performance during FY 2014 was very successful, marked by increases in 

productivity along with overall improvements in the timely resolution of cases. Despite an 

increase in case filings, the OGC exceeded its mission-critical performance targets for the timely 

resolution of ULP and representation cases and resolved six percent more cases than in FY 2013. 

The OGC closed over 4,800 ULP and 250 representation cases, conducted 52 representation 

elections, and held more than 30 ULP and representation hearings. 

The OGC has expanded its use of ADR techniques and 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 contact. The beneficial effects of voluntary ULP settlements and 

representation agreements are obvious and are aggressively pursued by the OGC.

In FY 2014, the parties informally resolved over 1,100 ULP cases during the investigative 

process. In addition, the OGC resolved 94 percent of the cases in which merit was found without 
6

the need for formal litigation. These successful voluntary ADR efforts resulted in significant 

savings of governmental staff and budgetary resources. For example, in May and June of 2014, 

the OGC received several ULP charges concerning an agency’s termination of alternative work 

schedules (AWS) at several of its facilities. These cases involved employees in several states 

and raised the prospect of time-consuming and expensive litigation if not resolved. Early on in 

the investigative process, the OGC offered the parties the opportunity to explore resolution of the 

cases through use of ADR. The parties accepted, and after working closely with the OGC for a 

few days, they reached a full resolution of the cases. The settlement provided for restoration of 

the AWS, and provided the parties with a framework for handling AWS issues that arise in the 

future. By using ADR to resolve these cases early on in the process, the OGC saved the parties 

time and money, and gave them a framework to resolve future related disputes on their own. 

The OALJ also continued to resolve cases in FY 2014 at an improved pace. In response to a 

backlog of cases awaiting decision, the agency reallocated resources, through details and 

temporary hires, to the OALJ to assist in resolving those cases more expeditiously. With over 

1,000 new cases on its docket in the last four years, 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 – without the need for a hearing. In FY 2014, in over 95 

percent of cases in which the parties participated in the Settlement Judge Program, they reached 

agreement and fully resolved their dispute. This is real evidence that the delivery of ADR 

services at all stages of case processing results in more effective and 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 even though the number of 

complaints remains high, exceeding 250 again in FY 2014. To reduce the need for final written 

decisions, the ALJs are encouraging the parties to request a bench decision when the matter is 

not settled prior to hearing, and a bench decision is appropriate under the facts of the case.

With respect to the FSIP, as an example of the FLRA’s important mission, in FY 2014, that 

component received 40 unexpected requests for assistance concerning bargaining over the 

impact and implementation of agency decisions to furlough employees during the shutdown to 

start the year. The FSIP prioritized disposition of those furlough-related cases – while 

maintaining timeliness in regard to the processing of non-furlough cases – using 

dispute-resolution procedures that maximized the possibility of voluntary settlements, rather than 

imposing contract terms. In turn, the Panel continued to obtain a high rate of voluntary 

settlement, 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 this regard, in cases where mediation-arbitration was used to 

resolve federal-sector impasses, the Panel obtained complete voluntary settlements 60 percent of 

the time.

The FSIP also continued to prioritize case processing to ensure that disruption to government 

operations and costs to taxpayers were minimized. Among the most significant examples of this 

prioritization were two impasses that arose as a result of Administration initiatives requiring 

agencies to ensure that their total square footage remains at their FY 2012 baseline levels and to 

dispose of excess properties. In this regard, the Department of Health and Human Services 

decided to relocate approximately 160 bargaining-unit employees in its Denver Regional Office, 
7

represented by the National Treasury Employees Union, to a more energy-efficient office, 

reducing space by 20 percent. Similarly, the Department of Housing and Urban Development 

decided to relocate approximately 200 bargaining-unit employees in its San Francisco Regional 

Office, represented by the National Federation of Federal Employees. Requests for FSIP 

assistance were filed in both cases requiring quick resolution of the parties’ impasses if the 

agencies involved were to avoid the costs of having to pay rent in two locations. The FSIP 

conducted mediation-arbitration proceedings at the sites of the disputes. When the parties were 

unable to reach voluntary settlements, arbitration awards were issued that prevented unnecessary 

taxpayer expenditures.

In addition, the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO) continues to 

help parties resolve significant disputes in cases pending before the Authority. The CADRO also 

delivers “prevention” services, teaching parties techniques for effectively resolving labormanagement issues on their own, without needing third-party involvement. These types of 

services have helped the parties develop constructive workplace relationships that promote better 

mission performance, as well as quality of work life – real evidence that the program works. In 

fact, 96 percent of CADRO cases in FY 2014 resulted in full resolution of the underlying dispute 

and closure of the pending case. The parties report that these ADR services improve their ability 

to resolve important problems, make critical decisions, and develop a more successful problemsolving relationship. Moreover, CADRO initiatives serve the dual purpose of preventing 

unnecessary litigation before the FLRA and making case processing more effective and efficient. 

Noteworthy CADRO cases in FY 2014 include a negotiability petition in which an agency 

proposed to consolidate and reorganize offices nationwide, potentially displacing – or 

terminating – more than 700 employees. The CADRO worked with two national unions and two 

separate agency bargaining teams to completely resolve all negotiability disputes, plus all of the 

underlying bargaining impasses. As a result, the agency has already begun implementing the 

consolidation with the resulting efficiencies, cost savings, and expected improvement in mission 

performance. And, in an arbitration-exception case, the embattled parties entered the CADRO 

process with a six-figure back-pay and attorney-fees dispute that had raged for years before it 

reached the FLRA. Highly competent counsel, who had the capacity to engage in protracted 

litigation, represented both parties. But, knowing the costs and the risks to both parties if they 

continued their litigation strategies, counsel found the CADRO process to be a safe alternative. 

The parties eventually achieved a complete settlement and ended that costly chapter in their 

shared history.

Two additional FY 2014 cases exemplify the value of CADRO training and facilitation services. 

The Air Force and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) jointly asked the 

CADRO to continue its efforts to address their joint concerns, including preserving tens of 

thousands of federal and private jobs at and around the largest industrial complex in the State of 

Georgia. Following dozens of hours of remote planning, support, and preparation, the CADRO 

led a joint FLRA-Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) team that trained top 

management and union leaders at Robins Air Force Base to collaboratively lead this vital 

initiative. The CADRO then led the development of a multi-year action plan to implement the 

fundamentals of a military support enterprise. In the other case, the AFGE and management at 

the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) jointly 
8

requested CADRO assistance to help them begin addressing mission-critical, labor-management 

issues from coast to coast. Following joint planning and preparation sessions, the CADRO 

facilitated a day-long gathering of more than 40 high-level managers and corresponding union 

officials from every sector of ICE operations. Long-term efforts must continue in order to make 

a lasting impact, but CADRO’s involvement enabled the parties to get off to a very strong start.

FY 2014 was also the first complete year that the CADRO conducted, under the auspices of the 

Chief ALJ, settlement activities in ULP cases pending with the OALJ, in addition to the 

CADRO’s ongoing intervention in negotiability and arbitration cases pending in the Authority. 

In doing so, CADRO resolved over 95 percent of ULP complaints in which the parties chose to 

avail themselves of ADR services under the OALJ Settlement Judge Program. In one of these 

cases, a party refused to execute terms of a collective-bargaining agreement directed by the FSIP, 

leading to a charge filed by the other party and a complaint issued by the OGC. Working 

through the Settlement Judge Program, it became apparent that the refusal resulted from lack of 

understanding about what the Statute requires under such circumstances. The settlement 

conference served as an example of how such forums can be used to educate the parties as to 

their respective obligations, in addition to obtaining immediate, cost-effective compliance with 

the Statute.

Further, the FLRA continued to provide training to members of the labor-management 

community – union representatives, agency representatives, and neutrals – in all aspects of its 

law and case processes. The FLRA, as a whole, provided 225 separate training sessions to over 

5,100 participants. 

The Authority provided training at several conferences, including the Federal Dispute Resolution 

and the Society of Federal Labor and Employee Relations Professionals Conferences, and an 

arbitration workshop sponsored by the National Academy of Arbitrators and the FMCS. 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 negotiability training 

and comprehensive arbitration training. 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. Feedback received from 

participants in these sessions indicates that these trainings produced the desired results and will 

further the above goals in future cases.

The OGC focuses its training efforts on the parties at the local level where the work is performed

and the labor-relations issues arise. By bringing its training services directly to the parties, the 

OGC educates local 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’s training initiative is 

intended to make case processing more effective and efficient and to better serve the parties by 

providing meaningful and clear guidance on statutory rights and responsibilities. Ensuring that 

OGC customers are knowledgeable about their rights and obligations under the Statute, as well 
9

as FLRA case law, regulations, and case-processing procedures furthers timely and efficient case 

processing.

Further, the FLRA supports the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations (the 

National Council) by training practitioners and labor-management-forum participants pursuant to 

Executive Order 13522, Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of 

Government Services. Such training includes critical process skills, such as communications and 

consensus decision making, guidance on rights and responsibilities under the Statute, as well as 

FLRA case law, regulations, and case-processing procedures. The FLRA’s training, facilitation, 

and support of the National Council remain critical to the implementation and ongoing success of 

the Order. When appropriate, the FLRA – primarily through the CADRO and the OGC –

partners with other agencies, such as the FMCS, to train practitioners and support labormanagement forums.

In 2014, the FLRA captured the rank of #5 in the Partnership for Public Service’s 2014 Best 

Places to Work in the Federal Government rankings – up from #8 in 2013 with a remarkable 9.5 

point increase in its index score! This is an extraordinary accomplishment reflecting a dramatic 

and unprecedented improvement of over 300 percent since 2009 – the year in which the FLRA 

placed last in the survey. And it reflects the on-going and undying commitment of agency 

leadership at all levels to improving employee satisfaction and morale. This commitment, which 

began in 2009, resulted first in the FLRA being named the 2010 Most Improved Small Agency by 

the Partnership for Public Service. Building on that success in 2011, the agency once again 

placed among the top of the most improved small agencies, and in 2012 and 2013, it captured the 

#7 and #8 small-agency rankings, respectively. Most notable for 2014 were the FLRA’s 

rankings for certain Best In Class categories: #1 in Effective Leadership - Leaders, Pay, and 

Strategic Management; #2 in Overall Effective Leadership and Training & Development; and #3 

in Effective Leadership - Supervisors; Teamwork; and Performance-Based Rewards & 

Advancement. 

Empowering employees is a key component of effective leadership, and, in 2013, the FLRA was 

recognized by the Partnership’s Federal Leadership Snapshot as the #3 small agency for its 

effective leadership in the federal government. The agency’s 2013 score of 70 far exceeded the 

government-wide average of 53. The FLRA was also noted as the #2 small agency in terms of 

0

20

40

60

80

100

2005 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Best Places to Work Score
10

leadership communication, with a 2013 score of 74 compared to the government-wide average of 

50. Effective leadership is not only important for directing an organization’s operations and 

motivating its workforce, but also in guiding an organization through tough decisions about how 

to meet increased demand for services in a constrained resource environment. Most importantly, 

effective communication from organizational leaders is necessary to establish a transparent, 

positive work environment. The FLRA’s leadership has played a pivotal role in advancing the 

agency’s mission results, increasing program effectiveness and efficiency, and motivating 

employees.

In 2014, the FLRA also continued its success in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, with an 

employee response rate of 83 percent – significantly higher than the government-wide average of 

47 percent. The FLRA’s 2014 positive ratings increased from 2013 in 61 items. And the 

FLRA’s Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework index scores increased in 

every category – by as much as seven percent over 2013. Specifically, the agency scored 78 

percent in “Leadership and Knowledge Management,” 71 percent in “Results-Oriented 

Performance Culture,” 79 percent in “Talent Management,” and 75 percent in “Job Satisfaction” 

– exceeding the government-wide average in each. These responses reflect the FLRA’s progress 

toward meeting government-wide human capital objectives and the relationship to organizational 

performance. And, consistent with an agency-wide focus on targeting challenges identified in 

the survey, the FLRA addresses areas of weakness or concern in full collaboration with 

employees at all levels through its own Labor-Management Forum. As an example, the FLRA 

placed special emphasis in FY 2014 on strengthening supervisory skills and improving the 

supervisor-employee relationship, especially as it relates to giving and receiving feedback on 

performance.

The FLRA’s dramatic and sustained improvement over the last five 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. Consistent with the agency’s significant increase in 

employee morale and satisfaction since 2009 has been a marked improvement in the FLRA’s 

mission performance and the delivery of services to its customers.
11

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

STRATEGIC AND PERFORMANCE-PLANNING FRAMEWORK

Over the last several years, through a comprehensive review – by agency leadership and the 

Union of Authority Employees, the employees’ representative organization – 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 has engaged in a continuous assessment of performance and 

other data to ensure that it is accomplishing its mission, effectively and efficiently, and that it is 

promoting innovation throughout the agency.

The FLRA’s performance-planning framework is based on the agency’s FY 2010 - 2015 

Strategic Plan, which is now in the process of revision, and is supported by the Annual 

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

Performance Plan reflects the FLRA’s commitment to establishing meaningful measures that 

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

staffing and training needs. The Annual Performance Plan also demonstrates the FLRA’s 

ongoing commitment to organizational excellence. 

Consistent with the government-wide initiative to leverage existing data to facilitate agencies' 

programmatic work and enhance the value of data, the FLRA 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 data contained in the MAPS Report is examined in a variety of forums, and 

the status toward meeting the agency’s case-processing performance goals are shared with all 

employees through the weekly, agency-wide newsletter. 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 Office of the General Counsel (OGC), and the 

Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP or the Panel); and monthly disposition reports, which track 

the number, age, and resolution type of every closed case within 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 level; and reallocation of resources, including use of details, contract support, and 

temporary hires. As to the latter point, after identifying a backlog of cases awaiting decision in 

the Office of the Administrative Law Judges (OALJ), the FLRA reallocated an attorney position 

to the office; utilized internal details; created and filled an additional, temporary not-to-exceed, 

six-month attorney appointment; and contracted for time-specific paralegal support to increase 

mission performance in that office.
12

FLRA Strategic Goals

1. Achieve superior customer service.

2. Develop leaders at every level to meet goals and position the agency for the future.

3. Advance performance through organizational and management excellence.

4. Develop, empower, and engage FLRA employees to meet program needs and improve job 

satisfaction.

The FLRA seeks to achieve its strategic goals primarily through the timely review and 

disposition of cases. The agency supplements these efforts with a focus on reducing litigation 

and its attendant costs by helping parties resolve their own disputes through collaboration, 

alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and labor-management-cooperation activities. These 

efforts are further supported by the FLRA’s focus on internal improvements in information 

technology (IT) and more effective and efficient use of human capital. 

FY 2016 Performance Goals

1. Provide timely review and disposition of unfair-labor-practice cases.

2. Provide timely review and disposition of representation cases.

3. Provide timely review and disposition of arbitration cases.

4. Provide timely review and disposition of negotiability cases.

5. Provide timely review and disposition of bargaining-impasse cases.

6. Use collaboration techniques and alternative-dispute-resolution services to minimize 

and/or resolve labor-management disputes.

7. Modernize agency information-technology business systems to support and enhance 

program achievement.

8. Develop, manage, and utilize the FLRA’s human capital to meet program needs.

Timeliness

Improvements in the timeliness of case disposition further the FLRA’s critical role in facilitating 

orderly, efficient, and effective 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 dispute resolution – or dispute avoidance – is 

critical to this endeavor.

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

effects on employee working conditions and implicate the bargaining rights of the more than 1.2 

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

timely agreements or, failing that, have their disagreements resolved expeditiously, 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.
13

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 

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

case, at every step, results in better, faster 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 – such as the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service

(FMCS) and the Department of Veterans Administration – to train large numbers of practitioners, 

and supporting labor-management forums, pursuant to Executive Order 13522, Creating LaborManagement Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services.

In addition, the FLRA’s training initiative is 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 Federal Service 

Labor-Management Relations Statute (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 and that 

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 – along with 

other training, outreach, and facilitation services – to assist parties in minimizing and 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 and automation of agency processes continue to be key areas of focus for the agency. Both 

are fundamental for ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the FLRA, as measured by the 

agency’s ability to meet its annual performance goals. The agency continues to improve its 

efficiency and 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 a significant emphasis on IT modernization to ensure that its equipment and infrastructure 

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

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. As expected, eFiling 

has already begun to increase efficiency by reducing procedural-filing errors and resulting 

processing delays. This efficiency is expected to increase over time with expansion and 

increased use of the agency’s eFiling system, and is yet another example of the FLRA’s ongoing 

efforts to better serve its customers and to provide current and useful online tools for federal 

employees, the unions that represent them, and federal agencies for resolving issues under the 

Statute. In FY 2014, the agency completed the infrastructure necessary to launch the final phase 

of eFiling, which will enable the parties to electronically file cases with the OALJ. As of the 
14

first quarter of FY 2015, all four of the agency offices that receive case filings – the FSIP, the 

Authority, the OGC, and the OALJ – were thus be capable of receiving them electronically. 

Having successfully implemented eFiling in all four components is a major step towards meeting 

the agency’s long-term goal of having all cases filed electronically and creating an “end-to-end” 

electronic case file for all cases. Moreover, through eFiling-specific training and outreach, in FY 

2014, nearly 40 percent of Authority cases were filed electronically. Future training and

outreach is expected to increase eFiling throughout all agency components. 

The eFiling system provides the platform for development of an “end-to-end” electronic case 

file. As such, in FY 2014, the agency devoted significant effort to automating functions between 

office-specific eFiling and existing case-management systems. This automation immediately 

increased case-processing efficiency – administrative staff no longer needs to manually enter 

data regarding an eFiling into the office’s existing electronic case-tracking system because that 

process is now automated. The agency also made significant progress in building the 

infrastructure for transferring cases and case documents electronically – rather than by hard copy 

– from office to office. In this regard, the agency successfully completed its pilot electroniccase-file program between the Authority and the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute 

Resolution Office (CADRO). The Authority and the CADRO now share all case files 

electronically, thus, the agency met its FY 2014 goal of creating a fully electronic case file for at 

least one component. This will serve as the model for implementing the agency’s long-term goal 

of sharing electronic case files throughout the FLRA, as well as the OMB-mandated target of 

having all electronic files by 2019. In support of this endeavor, the agency has “mapped out” the 

flow of cases between various agency components and developed a plan for transferring cases 

between all components. The agency has taken initial steps to identify electronic 

document-management solutions that will work in tandem with the agency’s electronic 

case-management systems to provide the required storage space and capacity for an “end-to-end” 

electronic case file.

Human Capital

Capturing the rank of #5 in the 2014 Best Places to Work in the Federal Government rankings –

up from #8 last year – there is no doubt that the FLRA continues to have a highly engaged 

workforce that is dedicated to the accomplishment of its mission. As evidence of this, the results 

of the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) 2014 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

(FEVS) show that: 83 percent of eligible employees responded to the survey; 100 percent of 

FLRA respondents report that they are willing to put in extra effort to get a job done; 97 percent 

indicate that they are being held accountable for achieving results; 96 percent know how their 

work relates to the agency’s goals and priorities; and 94 percent know what is expected of them 

on the job. The agency’s values of transparency, open dialogue, and pre-decisional involvement 

allow for effective communication and continuous feedback around mission performance and 

agency operations. 

In addition, the FLRA invests 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. In this connection, employees at all 

levels – both professional and administrative-support staff – delivered positive agency outcomes 
15

and led numerous mission-related initiatives, including: the development of the FLRA’s 

bilingual webpages; a decision-writing initiative intended to strengthen the quality of the 

Authority’s decisions; and the development 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.

Internal developmental details 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 more closely matched to their career interests. Position descriptions were 

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 for 

FLRA employees.

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

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

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

FLRA launched a 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. The 

agency had not provided such targeted leadership development for its employees in more than 15 

years. And the FLRA developed and provided 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 collaboration among peers. 

The agency also updated its Attorney Recruitment Policy in order to allow managers greater 

hiring flexibility with respect to the agency’s only mission-critical occupation – attorney – and to 

expedite the recruitment process. And, in collaboration with the Partnership for Public Service’s 

Excellence in Government Fellows program, the agency developed and piloted an Employee 

Onboarding Handbook to enhance and standardize the onboarding process. 

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

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

agency achieved greater diversity in its workforce in FY 2014 by increasing targeted recruitment 

and posting job opportunities with career planning and placement services, local colleges and 

universities, and professional affinity-group organizations. The FLRA also utilized both Student 

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

the agency. 

Further, based on employee feedback provided through the 2014 FEVS, the FLRA moved into 

the top scoring ranking in terms of “New IQ Performance,” which measures the results of 
16

20 separate survey questions related to inclusive environments. In particular, 81 percent of 

FLRA respondents – compared to 73 percent in 2013 – reported that supervisors work well with 

employees of different backgrounds. And 73 percent of respondents – a twelve percent increase 

from 2013 – stated that the FLRA’s policies and programs promote diversity in the workplace 

(e.g., recruiting minorities and women, training in awareness of diversity issues, mentoring). 

Both of these statistics show that the FLRA is well above the government-wide average with 

respect to both questions – nearly 20 percent higher for each.

GOAL 1: PROVIDE TIMELY REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF 

UNFAIR-LABOR-PRACTICE CASES.

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

prosecution of all unfair-labor-practice (ULP) charges. ULP cases originate with the filing of a 

charge in a Regional Office by an employee, labor organization, or 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 Administrative Law Judge (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 the decision to the General Counsel in Washington, 

D.C. If the dismissal is upheld, then the case is closed. The Authority has appointed ALJs to 

hear ULP cases prosecuted by the General Counsel. Decisions of the ALJs are transmitted to the 

Authority and may be affirmed, modified, or reversed in whole or in part. If no exceptions are 

filed, then a decision by the ALJ is adopted by the Authority.

OGC 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 1,811 1,453 1,488 1,570 1,425 1,231

Charges filed 4,094 4,375 4,659 4,696 4,736 4,783

Total caseload 5,905 5,828 6,147 6,266 6,161 6,014

Charges withdrawn/settled 3,425 3,377 3,646 3,779 3850 3900

Charges dismissed 812 732 673 809 820 840

Complaints issued 215 231 258 253 260 280

Total cases closed 4,452 4,340 4,577 4,841 4,930 5,020

Cases pending, end of year 1,453 1,488 1,570 1,425 1,231 994
17

OALJ 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 54 72 115 120 110 14

Cases received from the OGC 234 240 271 260 186 186

Total caseload 288 312 386 380 296 200

Settlements before hearing 191 177 223 240 228 162

Cases closed by decision 25 20 43 30 54 38

Total cases closed 216 197 266 270 282 200

Cases pending, end of year 72 115 120 110 14 0

Authority 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 14 6 2 12 13 25

Exceptions filed 17 20 27 27 44 44

Total caseload 31 26 29 39 57 69

Cases closed procedurally 13 16 16 18 32 32

Cases closed based on merits 12 8 1 8 0 0

Total cases closed 25 24 17 26 32 32

Cases pending, end of year 6 2 12 13 25 37

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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

54% 61% 68% 67% 68% 70%

The OGC has increased its FY 2015 target for this measure from 65 percent to 68 percent, based 

on actual performance over the past few years.

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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

97%/100% 99%/100% 100%/100% 98%/100% 95%/100% 95%/100%

The FY 2015 target for this measure (appeal of a dismissal within 60 days) has been increased by 

the OGC as well, from 90 percent to 95 percent, based on past performance.
18

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 Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

95% 90% 86% 91% 90% 90%

Measure 1.4: The percentage of ULP cases decided within 180 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

31% 75% 100% 50% 65% 75%

The Authority has increased its FY 2015 target for this measure, from 60 percent to 65 percent, 

to reflect an emphasis on eliminating overage cases. For more than ten months of FY 2014, the 

Authority lacked a quorum of Members necessary to issue decisions. When the Authority 

regained its quorum, it immediately focused its efforts on addressing and issuing decisions in 

those cases in its inventory that had already exceeded the 180-day performance goal – defined as 

a “backlog.”

GOAL 2: PROVIDE 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 by the filing in 

a Regional Office of a petition by an individual, a labor organization, or an agency. 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.
19

OGC 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 127 107 95 87 66 50

Petitions filed 267 271 240 235 245 252

Total caseload 394 378 335 322 311 302

Petitions withdrawn 126 115 106 118 120 122

Cases closed based on merits 161 168 142 138 141 143

Total cases closed 287 283 248 256 261 265

Cases pending, end of year 107 95 87 66 50 37

Authority 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 6 6 0 9 7 7

Applications for review 12 6 11 13 12 12

Total caseload 18 12 11 22 19 19

Cases closed procedurally 0 0 1 2 0 0

Cases closed based on merits 12 12 1 13 12 12

Total cases closed 12 12 2 15 12 12

Cases pending, end of year 6 0 9 7 7 7

Measure 2.1: 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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

60% 62% 60% 66% 60% 60%

Measure 2.2: The percentage of representation cases in which a decision whether to grant 

review is issued within 60 days of assignment to an Authority Member.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

GOAL 3: PROVIDE TIMELY REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF 

ARBITRATION CASES.

Either party to grievance arbitration may file with the Authority an exception (or appeal) to an 

arbitrator’s award. The Authority will review an arbitrator’s award to which an exception has 
20

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 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 173 66 40 123 90 90

Exceptions filed 110 107 124 89 104 104

Total caseload 283 173 164 212 194 194

Cases closed procedurally 22 24 19 16 12 12

Cases closed based on merits 195 109 22 106 92 92

Total cases closed 217 133 41 122 104 104

Cases pending, end of year 66 40 123 90 90 90

Measure 3.1: The percentage of arbitration cases decided within 180 days of assignment to an 

Authority Member.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

33% 58% 91% 34% 65% 75%

The Authority has also increased its FY 2015 target for this measure, from 60 percent to 65 

percent, to reflect the lack of a quorum in FY 2014 and an emphasis on eliminating overage 

cases in FY 2015.

GOAL 4: PROVIDE 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 these cases, a union may petition the 

Authority to resolve the negotiability dispute.
21

Authority 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015 

Est.

2016 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 22 15 8 9 17 17

Petitions filed 39 45 30 43 32 32

Total caseload 61 60 38 52 49 49

Cases closed procedurally 33 38 27 29 28 28

Cases closed based on merits 13 14 2 6 4 4

Total cases closed 46 52 29 35 32 32

Cases pending, end of year 15 8 9 17 17 17

Measure 4.1: The percentage of negotiability cases decided within 180 days of assignment to 

an Authority Member (reflecting reasonable time for a post-petition conference).

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

29% 50% 100% 17% 65% 75%

The FY 2015 target for this measure has been increased by the Authority as well, from 60 

percent to 65 percent, based on the lack of a quorum in FY 2014 and an emphasis in FY 2015 on 

eliminating overage cases.

GOAL 5: PROVIDE 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.

FSIP 2011 2012 2013 2014

2015

Est.

2016

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 36 53 38 40 28 20

Impasses filed 152 176 194 134 124 124

Total caseload 188 229 232 174 152 144

Cases closed 135 191 192 146 132 132

Cases pending, end of year 53 38 40 28 20 12
22

Measure 5.1: The percentage of bargaining impasse cases in which jurisdiction is declined 

closed within 140 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

64% 92% 95% 89% 80% 80%

Measure 5.2: The percentage of bargaining impasse cases voluntarily settled after jurisdiction 

has been asserted within 160 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

79% 86% 97% 68% 70% 70%

Measure 5.3: The percentage of bargaining impasse cases resolved through a final action 

closed within 200 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

65% 77% 87% 61% 70% 70%

GOAL 6: USE COLLABORATION TECHNIQUES AND 

ALTERNATIVE-DISPUTE-RESOLUTION SERVICES TO MINIMIZE 

AND/OR RESOLVE LABOR-MANAGEMENT DISPUTES.

The FLRA has integrated ADR and consensus decision-making into virtually all of its processes, 

and 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 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.

Measure 6.1: 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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

87% 97% 98% 98% 95% 95%
23

Measure 6.2: 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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

88% 80% 78% 96% 80% 80%

Measure 6.3: 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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

93% 91% 100% 100% 95% 95%

Measure 6.4: 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 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

100% N/A 100% 80% 80% 80%

In FY 2012, there was only one arbitration case in which an offer of ADR services was accepted 

by the parties, and ADR in that case was still ongoing at the end of the fiscal year. As a result, 

this performance measure did not apply in FY 2012.

Measure 6.5: 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 Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

87% 100% 100% 100% 90% 90%

The wording of Measure 6.5 has been revised in FY 2015 and FY 2016. It is intended to more 

accurately reflect the workload in negotiability ADR activities. Specifically, the new wording 

measures proposals and provisions, not “cases,” and recognizes that all cases are not the same 

because some involve only one proposal or provision, and others involve many.

Measure 6.6: Percentage of bargaining impasse cases in which an offer of ADR services is 

accepted by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

29% 32% 28% 27% 30% 30%
24

Measure 6.7: The number of training, outreach, and facilitation activities conducted.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

332 221 302 225 200 200

Measure 6.8: The number of participants involved in training, outreach, and facilitation 

activities.

Results Targets

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

11,975 8,933 5,976 5,114 5,000 5,000

The FLRA has reduced its FY 2015 target for this measure from 6,000 to 5,000, based on actual 

performance over the past few years. Much of the demand for training, outreach, and facilitation 

activities in FY 2011 and FY 2012 was for overview training on instituting forums and predecisional involvement under Executive Order 13522. Because this training is now available 

through a web-based training course, and since forums are now well-established, the FLRA 

expects the focus of its services to be on supporting the successful operation of these forums and 

further developing the skills for a successful labor-management relationship.

GOAL 7: MODERNIZE AGENCY INFORMATION-TECHNOLOGY 

BUSINESS SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT AND ENHANCE PROGRAM 

ACHIEVEMENT.

The FLRA continues to improve its efficiency and the customer-service experience by engaging 

in new and innovative ways to conduct business – and the greatest example of this is through

eFiling. eFiling is, however, only one aspect of the FLRA’s electronic innovation initiative. The 

eFiling system provides the platform for development of an “end-to-end” electronic case file. 

And efforts to date, serve as the model for implementing the agency’s long-term goal of 

electronic case files throughout all offices, as well as the OMB-mandated target of 100 percent 

electronic files by 2019.

Measure 7.1: The percentage of cases filed electronically with the FLRA.

Results

FY 2011

Began developing an eFiling solution. Completed development of customer 

registration and FSIP eFiling capability.

FY 2012

Completed development of Authority and OGC eFiling capability. Began 

testing eFiling capability with customers.

FY 2013 10%

FY 2014 12%
25

Targets

FY 2015 25%

FY 2016 50%

The target for this measure has been revised in FY 2015 to acknowledge and account for the 

FLRA’s initiative to development a more intuitive, user-friendly eFiling interface. Based on 

customer feedback, the FLRA recognizes that to fully implement strategies – including training 

and outreach – to maximize eFiling, it is necessary to first develop and leverage enhancements to 

the FLRA’s eFiling customer-facing capabilities.

Measure 7.2: The percentage of cases processed electronically end-to-end.

Results

FY 2011 N/A

FY 2012

Enhanced the CMS to provide the structure that supports end-to-end 

electronic case processing.

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.

Targets

FY 2015 Complete full integration of the CMS and eFiling systems, enabling end-toend electronic case processing throughout the agency.

FY 2016 Maintain full integration of the CMS and eFiling systems, enabling end-toend electronic case processing throughout the agency.

This measure was established in FY 2012 to serve as an indicator of success in developing and 

implementing an end-to-end electronic case file.

GOAL 8: DEVELOP, MANAGE, AND UTILIZE THE FLRA’S HUMAN 

CAPITAL TO MEET PROGRAM NEEDS.

Over the last five-and-a-half years, the FLRA has demonstrated significant and marked 

improvement in its performance and service delivery, and 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.
26

Measure 8.1: Program managers ensure that the right employees are in the right place to 

achieve results.

Results

FY 2011

Continued to focus on employee engagement. Through its LaborManagement Forum, updated the agency’s Alternative Work Schedule policy, 

which increased flexibility within the program; began work on recognizing 

diversity through special-emphasis programs; and initiated efforts to update 

employee-awards programs. Formed a joint labor-management workgroup to 

design a new Performance-Management System for General Schedule 

employees for OPM approval and agency implementation. Through an 

employee workgroup, designed and submitted to OPM for approval a revised 

Senior Executive Service (SES) appraisal system. Consistent with the 

agency’s Human Capital Strategic Plan, developed a training-needs 

assessment, which will be used to create individual-development plans to 

address areas needing skills improvement and to further increase missioncritical competencies. Supported employee ideas, initiatives, and employeefocused programs, such as “Bring Your Child to Work” day, Public-Service 

Recognition Week, a health-benefits fair, and a blood drive. Initiated brownbag programs and an educational series to inform and develop employees in a 

casual setting. Continued human capital e-initiatives with the successful 

implementation of USAStaffing, the DataMart reporting tool, and employee 

eOPFs.

FY 2012

Enhanced development offerings, to include competency-based training, 

career-ladder developmental programs, and continuation of human resources 

workshops and educational brown-bags. Drafted and implemented a fiveyear Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan to make the agency a more 

inclusive and inviting workplace for all of its employees. Increased diversity 

by hiring summer student interns, in some cases using targeted 

minority-hiring strategies. Expanded developmental offerings, to include 

attorney details.

FY 2013

Implemented a web-based time and attendance 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 performance-management 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

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 
27

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.

Targets

FY 2015

Implement a fully automated and integrated electronic system for personnel 

actions, as well as a learning management system. Develop a more robust 

onboarding process through increased use of technology and implementation 

of an Employee Onboarding Handbook. Update significant human-resources

policies and procedures. Build internal capacity for handling the major 

human-resources functional areas. Improve office customer service by 

improving the quality of advice provided to managers and employees. Work 

with managers to educate about and increase diversity and inclusion when 

seeking new agency talent.

FY 2016

Fully automate the agency performance-management system. Ensure that all 

position descriptions and job classification information has been updated 

within the past three years. Continue to update significant human-resources 

policies and procedures. 
28

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

FY 2015 APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE

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, 

[$25,548,000] $26,550,000: 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. (Financial Services and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2015.)

APPROPRIATION REQUEST

The FLRA requests $26,550,000 in FY 2016 to fund employee salaries and related operating 

expenses necessary to meet its annual performance targets. The agency’s FY 2016 request 

would fund 140 full-time equivalents (FTEs) – an increase of five over FY 2015.

(In thousands of dollars)

Program Activity

FY 2014

Actual

FY 2015 

Estimate

FY 2016 

Request

Change 

from 

FY 2015

Authority $14,526 $13,882 $14,272 $390

Office of the General Counsel 10,052 10,751 11,269 518

Federal Service Impasses Panel 814 968 1,009 41

Direct Obligations $25,392 $25,601 $26,550 $949

FTEs 121 135 140 5

Note: The FY 2015 estimate includes $53,000 in anticipated carryover funding from the prior year.

The requested FY 2016 level incorporates cost-savings measures initiated over the past few years

to increase program effectiveness and to reduce fragmentation, overlap, and duplication. The 

launch of the FLRA’s modernized website and continual enhancements to the site, for example, 

have allowed the agency to provide timely and accurate information to its customers – other 

federal agencies and federal unions – including FLRA decisions, legal guidance and 
29

memorandums, policy documents, and legal training and resources. Providing this information

in the past involved costly printing and publication, which have since been eliminated.

Furthermore, the requested level reflects an approximate 35 percent decrease in information 

technology (IT) spending since FY 2010. 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 2015

The requested FY 2016 funding level includes an increase of $949,000 over FY 2015 to cover 

rising employee compensation and benefit costs and office rent, and to provide for five

additional FTEs – one in the Authority and four in the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). It 

is noted that, based on improvements in productivity from streamlining, creative use of 

technology, and elimination of low priority tasks and programs, the FLRA intends to absorb all 

inflationary increases for FY 2016 contractual goods and services within its baseline resource 

levels.

Personnel Compensation and Benefits

The timeliness in which the OGC resolves unfair labor practice (ULP) and representation cases, 

the quality of case dispositions, and the extent to which the parties are able to take full advantage 

of dispute resolution opportunities directly affects the pace of government change. The core 

purpose of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute is to promote collective 

bargaining as a means of fostering improved employee performance and government operations. 

It is clear that productive and effective labor-management relations are necessary for designing 

and implementing the comprehensive changes required to reform government, and that effective 

labor-management relations are dependent on both the timely resolution of disputes and the 

engagement of federal employees and their union representatives as essential sources of frontline ideas and information about improvements in the delivery of government services.

In this regard, the OGC has a direct influence on how well and quickly changes proposed by 

agencies can be implemented by resolving – among other things – disputes involving collective 

bargaining matters and questions concerning the labor representation of federal employees. 

Accordingly, the FLRA request includes an additional $360,000 to establish four new entry-level 

agent positions in the OGC to keep pace with the projected increase in ULP charges over the 

next two years and to continue showing improvement in resolving ULP cases within 120 days of 

filing. Improvement in the timeliness of case disposition furthers the office’s critical role in 

facilitating orderly, efficient, and effective change within the federal government.

FLRA employees throughout the agency are directly involved in providing parties with 

alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services, which, in turn, are key to resolving cases timely, 

as well as in preventing future disputes. Throughout the years, recognizing the benefits and costsavings associated with using ADR to resolve disputes, the FLRA has integrated ADR 

techniques into all aspects of its case processing, resulting in parties reaching faster, more 
30

mutually agreeable, and more effective resolution of their disputes than that achieved through 

litigation. Moreover, use of ADR furthers the Administration’s policies and principles of 

promoting and supporting organizational performance through cooperative and productive labormanagement relations throughout the federal government.

Based on the tremendous success of the FLRA’s ADR activities in FY 2014, the agency is also 

requesting $92,000 to fund an additional entry-level position to be devoted exclusively to those 

activities beginning in FY 2016. This will, in turn, permit the FLRA to increase not only its 

efforts to resolve existing disputes, but also to engage in the kind of facilitation and training that 

prevents disputes. As examples, the OGC settles nearly 100 percent of all ULP and 

representation cases where the parties agree to use ADR services. In addition, the office resolves 

nearly 100 percent of the ULP cases where a complaint has been authorized without the need for 

formal litigation. In the Authority, the same results are reached in negotiability and arbitration 

cases where the parties agree to use ADR. In fact, FY 2014 results show that 100 percent of 

negotiability cases (where the parties agreed to use ADR) reached full or partial settlement. And 

the settlements are faster (and cheaper) than formal case adjudications. Referring again to 

negotiability cases, the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office assisted parties 

to reach complete agreement in 16 cases in FY 2014. If those 16 cases had required formal 

adjudication by the Authority, at least one full year’s work by an Authority attorney would have 

been required. And, of course, not only the Authority’s, but also the parties’ resources are 

conserved by the settlements. These are real results, which would be enhanced significantly by 

an additional position.

The FY 2016 request includes an increase of $340,000 to provide for statutory pay raises of one 

percent in January 2015 and 1.3 percent in January 2016. It also includes agency benefit costs 

that, as a percentage of compensation, continue to rise as the percentage of the FLRA’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 retirement benefits cost the FLRA, on average, twice 

as much as CSRS benefits, per employee. The agency’s personnel benefits estimate, therefore, 

assumes that the on-going, government-wide transition to the FERS will cost the FLRA an 

additional $92,000 in FY 2016, including the scheduled increase in agency contributions.

Rent

The FLRA places an emphasis on telework, and it will seek 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” or “intermittently.” Telework has also contributed to increased employee morale, 

as measured by the Office of Personnel Management’s Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. 

Feedback from staff indicates that, due to a lack of disruptions, reduced commuting times, and 

decreased stress, participating employees believe that they are more productive and that they 

have fewer unscheduled absences. Furthermore, the opportunity to telework has proven useful 

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

several employees to stay with the agency.
31

The agency makes rental payments to the General Services Administration for office space in 

Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, San Francisco, and Washington, DC. The previous 

FLRA headquarters lease in Washington, DC expired in March 2013. In response to growing 

participation in the agency telework program, the FLRA reduced the size of its headquarters by 

approximately 12,200 square feet, commencing with the new lease term. The reduction in

headquarters space allowed the agency to offset the substantial and significant market increase in 

rental rates in the Washington, DC area. Despite reducing its overall space footprint, however, 

an additional $65,000 will still be necessary in FY 2016 to cover the annual increase over 

FY 2015.
32

PROGRAM AND FINANCING SCHEDULE

(In thousands of dollars)

FY 2014 

Actual

FY 2015 

Estimate

FY 2016 

Request

Obligations by program activity:

Authority $14,583 $13,907 $14,272

Office of the General Counsel 10,029 10,821 11,269

Federal Service Impasses Panel 803 973 1,009

Total new obligations 25,415 25,701 26,550

Budgetary resources:

Non-expenditure transfers:

Unobligated balance transfers between expired 

and unexpired accounts

0 53 0

Budget authority:

Appropriations, discretionary:

Appropriation, discretionary (total) 25,500 25,548 26,550

Borrowing authority, discretionary:

Spending authority from offsetting 

collections, discretionary (total) 23 100 0

Total budgetary resources available 25,523 25,701 26,550

Change in obligated balance:

Unpaid obligations:

Unpaid obligations, brought forward, Oct. 1 2,588 2,851 2,851

Obligations incurred, unexpired accounts 25,415 25,701 26,550

Obligations incurred, expired accounts 72 0 0

Outlays (gross) (25,191) (25,701) (26,550)

Recoveries of prior-year unpaid obligations, 

expired accounts (33) 0 0

Unpaid obligations, end of year 2,851 2,851 2,851

Budget authority and outlays, net:

Discretionary:

Budget authority, gross 25,544 25,701 26,550

Outlays, gross:

Outlays from new discretionary authority 23,288 23,645 24,426

Outlays from discretionary balances 1,903 2,056 2,124

Outlays, gross (total) 25,191 25,701 26,550

Budget authority, net (total) 25,500 25,601 26,550

Outlays, net (total) 25,147 25,601 26,550
33

OBJECT CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE

(In thousands of dollars)

FY 2014 

Actual

FY 2015 

Estimate

FY 2016 

Request

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

Full-time permanent $13,260 $14,597 $15,238

Other than full-time permanent 801 840 848

Other personnel compensation 197 240 263

Total personnel compensation 14,258 15,677 16,349

Civilian personnel benefits 3,865 4,379 4,591

Travel and transportation of persons 191 220 220

Transportation of things 11 12 12

Rental payments to GSA 2,664 2,580 2,645

Rental payments to others 12 0 0

Communications, utilities, and misc. charges 345 387 387

Printing and reproduction 17 11 11

Other services from non-federal sources 1,732 1,013 1,013

Other goods and services from federal sources 1,080 843 843

Operation and maintenance of facilities 51 7 7

Operation and maintenance of equipment 125 282 282

Supplies and materials 504 120 120

Equipment 537 70 70

Direct obligations $25,392 $25,601 $26,550

Reimbursable obligations:

Travel and transportation of persons 23 100 0

Reimbursable obligations 23 100 0 

Total new obligations $25,415 $25,701 $26,550

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY SCHEDULE

FY 2014 

Actual

FY 2015 

Estimate

FY 2016 

Request

Direct civilian full-time equivalent employment 121 135 140
34

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 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 Inspector General conducts and supervises 

investigations, internal reviews, audits, and evaluations of the programs and operations of the 

agency. The Inspector General communicates the results of investigations and assessments to 

FLRA management, the Congress, other oversight entities, and the public as appropriate. 

Generally, results are communicated in formal reports and contain findings and 

recommendations aimed at correcting any deficiencies identified and promoting efficiency and 

effectiveness in agency programs and operations. The Inspector General also manages a hotline 

to provide employees and the public with a direct means for communicating information on 

potential fraud, waste, or abuse.

The FLRA’s FY 2016 funding request includes $449,138 for the OIG. The funding level 

requested by the Inspector General, including $5,000 for training and $1,210 to support the 

Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency has been funded in total. The 

Inspector General has certified that the FLRA’s funding request for the OIG satisfies all training 

requirements for FY 2016.
35

 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20424-0001

INSPECTOR GENERAL

July 28, 2014

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 2016:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
36

 The aggregate budget request for the operations of the OIG is $449,138.

 The portion of this amount needed for OIG training is $5,000, and

 The portion of this amount needed to support the CIGIE is $1,210.

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 2016.

Inspector General

Federal Labor Relations Authority

1

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

1400 K Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20424

www.flra.gov