Thirty-five 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 2015 
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. ......................................................................................................................... 20

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 LABORMANAGEMENT DISPUTES...................................................................................... 22

GOAL 7: MODERNIZE AGENCY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS 

SYSTEMS TO SUPPORT AND ENHANCE PROGRAM ACHIEVEMENT. .......... 25

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

TO MEET PROGRAM NEEDS................................................................................... 26

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................29

FY 2015 APPROPRIATION LANGUAGE............................................................................. 29

APPROPRIATION REQUEST................................................................................................ 29

CHANGE FROM FY 2014 ...................................................................................................... 30

PROGRAM AND FINANCING SCHEDULE ........................................................................ 33

OBJECT CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE............................................................................. 34

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY SCHEDULE ........................................................................... 34

INSPECTOR GENERAL RESOURCES................................................................................. 35
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 real 

genesis, however, 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 the 

timely, quality resolution of disputes, is essential for program performance government-wide. If 

a labor-management dispute remains unresolved for too long, then mission accomplishment 

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

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

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 five-year, staggered terms and 

one Member is designated by the President to serve as Chairman, who 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 the 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 alleged ULPs, 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 the 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, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and Federal District Courts. 

FOREIGN

SERVICE

LABOR

RELATIONS

BOARD

FOREIGN

SERVICE

IMPASSE

DISPUTES PANEL

AUTHORITY

MEMBERS

(2)

FEDERAL

SERVICE

IMPASSES

PANEL

GENERAL

COUNSEL

CHIEF COUNSEL 

TO THE 

CHAIRMAN

CHIEF COUNSELS

(ONE TO EACH

MEMBER)

& STAFF

COLLABORATION

AND

ALTERNATIVE

DISPUTE

RESOLUTION

OFFICE

REGIONAL

OFFICES

(7)

OFFICE OF THE

EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR

OFFICE OF THE

SOLICITOR

OFFICE OF THE

ADMINISTRATIVE

LAW JUDGES

OFFICE OF THE

INSPECTOR

GENERAL

EQUAL

EMPLOYMENT

OPPORTUNITY

PROGRAM

OFFICE OF CASE 

INTAKE

AND

PUBLICATION 

OFFICE

HUMAN

RESOURCES

DIVISION

ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES

DIVISION

INFORMATION

RESOURCES

MANAGEMENT

DIVISION

BUDGET AND

FINANCE

DIVISION

AUTHORITY 

CHAIRMAN AND 

CHIEF 

EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER
3

In this connection, parties aggrieved by certain Authority orders may institute an action 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 Privacy Act. The Solicitor also serves as the Designated 

Agency Ethics Official.

The Office of the General Counsel

Appointed for a five-year term by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, the 

General Counsel has independent statutory responsibility for investigating ULP charges and for 

filing and prosecuting ULP complaints. Pursuant to the Statute, the General Counsel has direct 

authority over, and responsibility for, all employees in the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), 

including those in the regions. The Regional Offices, on behalf of the General Counsel, 

investigate and resolve alleged ULPs, file and prosecute ULP complaints, and provide training 

and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services. In addition, through delegation by the 

Authority, the Regional Offices process representation petitions and conduct secret ballot 

elections.

The General Counsel has a small staff in FLRA Headquarters, located in Washington, DC. 

Headquarters management staff provides administrative oversight; develops policies, guidance, 

procedures, and manuals that provide programmatic direction for the OGC’s seven Regional 

Offices and training and education for the parties; and processes appeals from dismissal of ULP 

charges. Each Regional Office has a Regional Director who provides leadership and 

management expertise for the respective region.

Atlanta Regional 

Office

Boston Regional 

Office

Chicago Regional 

Office

Dallas Regional 

Office

Denver Regional 

Office

San Francisco 

Regional Office

Washington DC 

Regional Office
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 and/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 still are 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

FY 2013 presented virtually unprecedented challenges for the FLRA. To begin, each component 

of the FLRA – the Authority, the OGC, and the FSIP – experienced increased case filings. At 

the same time, the FLRA’s FY 2013 funding level, which like other agencies was reduced 

significantly by sequestration, coupled with uncertainty about the FY 2014 funding level, 

impaired the agency’s ability to fill key vacancies. These vacancies spanned across the agency, 

including case processing offices as well as the operational offices – Budget and Finance, 

Human Resources, Information Technology, and Administrative Services – which provide vital 

support services to ensure the basic functioning of the agency. And, perhaps most significantly, 

the Authority component lacked a quorum of Members from January 3, 2013, through the 

remainder of the fiscal year. This lack of quorum legally prevented the Authority component 

from discharging its key obligation under law: to issue decisions resolving labor-management 

disputes filed under the Statute.

These challenges, individually and collectively, posed obstacles to the agency’s ability to do its 

work effectively. And that work is critically important to the effectiveness and efficiency of the 

federal government as a whole. This is because the FLRA’s mission is to assist agencies, 

employees, and employee representatives to resolve disputes in order to effectuate the 

implementation of improvements in government operations. The FLRA is committed to 

fostering a productive and effective federal government, providing leadership in establishing 

policies and guidance related to federal sector labor-management relations, and ensuring 

compliance with the Statute.

In many respects, the FLRA was able to both overcome its obstacles and to excel in its 

performance. In response to the demands of its customers and its own fiscal limitations, the 
5

agency has examined what works – both with respect to its own internal management and 

processes and its delivery of services – and continues to demonstrate a significant, marked 

improvement in its performance and program delivery. Without question, the FLRA’s 

performance has had a direct bearing on how well and quickly improvements in government 

operations have been effectuated. The nature of the services that the agency provides to its 

customers – in avoiding and resolving disputes that otherwise detract from mission performance 

– means that its vitality is important beyond its size.

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

improvement – which began in February 2009 – in providing customers with the timely and 

quality dispute resolution services that they deserve. As a result of a comprehensive review of 

arbitration case processing, the Authority implemented regulatory changes in FY 2013 involving 

those cases. The evidence demonstrated that regulatory 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. There were real 

performance improvement outcomes from these changes – arbitration cases are now processed 

and resolved more expeditiously. With proven evidence that training its customers results in 

case-processing efficiencies and faster resolution of disputes, the Authority expanded its efforts, 

launching a comprehensive negotiability training program, including the issuance of a guide 

addressing negotiability terms and concepts, case-processing procedures, and substantive legal 

issues that frequently arise in negotiability disputes.

As to the FLRA’s strategic goals of providing timely review and disposition of ULP and 

representation cases, OGC performance during FY 2013 was very successful, marked by 

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

increase in case filings, the OGC continued its productivity increases by resolving nearly 25

percent more cases than in FY 2009, exceeded its goal for timely resolution of ULP cases by 

eight percent, and met its goal for timely processing of representation cases. The OGC closed 

over 4,570 ULP cases and held trials involving roughly 40 ULP complaints. The OGC also 

closed 248 representation cases, conducting 48 representation elections, and held 16 hearings. 

The OGC’s work is of critical importance to federal agencies throughout the government right 

now – all agencies are dealing with budgetary reductions and are restructuring operations 

(including conducting layoffs), examining and implementing new or revised work processes and 

procedures, and leveraging technology in order to bring efficiency to their operations. As 

recognized by Executive Order 13522, Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve 

Delivery of Government Services, harmonious labor-management relations is an essential 

element in the successful implementation of these necessary and difficult changes, and the work 

of the OGC plays a vital role in ensuring productive and efficient labor-management relations.

During these uncertain budgetary times, the OGC has redoubled its use of ADR techniques and 

services to resolve cases. The beneficial effects of ULP settlements and representation 

agreements are obvious and are aggressively pursued by the office. In this regard, significant 

savings of government staff and budgetary resources result from the early resolution of ULP and 

representation cases. To assist the parties, the OGC actively offers ADR throughout the 

processing of its cases and the parties welcome this service.
6

In FY 2013, the OGC successfully resolved over 900 ULP cases during the investigative process, 

including 189 cases where a formal complaint had been authorized. The OGC also successfully 

resolved 207 complaint cases before hearing. These successful ADR efforts resulted in 

significant savings of governmental budgetary resources.

The OALJ also continued to resolve cases at an increased pace in FY 2013, with over 40 

complaints resolved by written decision as compared to 20 in FY 2012. With over 1,000 new 

cases on their docket in the last four years, the OALJ has successfully resolved cases without the 

need for costly litigation involving a hearing or written decision. In this regard, in 78 percent of 

cases in which parties participate in the OALJ’s Settlement Judge Program, agreement is 

reached, fully resolving the parties’ 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. The 

OALJ has seen an increase in demand for its services, as the number of complaints and the 

number of hearings required continue to rise – both exceeding those in FY 2012. To reduce the 

need for final written decisions, the ALJs are encouraging the parties to volunteer for bench 

decisions 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 FLRA’s strategic goal concerning the review and resolution of bargaining 

impasse cases, the FSIP experienced an increase in case filings for the fifth consecutive year, 

including over 40 requests for assistance concerning bargaining over the impact and 

implementation of agency decisions to furlough employees due to sequestration. Its small 

professional staff did its best to investigate the unexpected influx of furlough-related cases, while 

maintaining timeliness in regard to the processing of non-furlough cases, recommending dispute 

resolution procedures to the Panel Members that maximized the possibility of voluntary 

settlements rather than imposing contract terms. In turn, the Members continued to obtain high 

rates 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 close 

to 65 percent of the time.

In balancing the use of its limited resources to meet the growing demands of its customers, the 

FSIP continued to prioritize case processing to ensure that disruption to government operations 

and cost to the taxpayers is minimized. For example, in response to Administration initiatives, 

Region 9 of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided to relocate approximately 500 

bargaining unit employees represented by two different labor organizations to a more energy 

efficient office in San Francisco, which reduced space by 20 percent. Using the expertise of one 

of its Panel Members in interest-based problem solving, a mediation-arbitration proceeding was 

convened where the parties were able to reach voluntary settlements on what appeared to be 

numerous intractable issues, permitting the EPA to complete the relocation without requiring 

taxpayers to pay rent at two locations. In another impasse involving the relocation of Region 7 

of the Department of Education in Kansas City, the Panel’s intervention resulted in an arbitration 

award by one of its Members, also preventing unnecessary taxpayer expenditures. As in 
7

previous years, the FSIP also conducted mediation-arbitration proceedings in a number of cases 

to resolve impasses expeditiously between the Social Security Administration and its unions over 

the floor plans for newly-relocated and renovated field offices. In addition, the Panel acted 

within the 60-day deadline established in the Federal Employees Flexible and Compressed Work 

Schedules Act by terminating the 4/10 compressed work schedules of civilian police officers at 

Portsmouth Naval Shipyard after the agency met its statutory burden by demonstrating that the 

schedules were causing unnecessary increases in overtime costs.

As to the FLRA’s strategic goal of using collaboration techniques and alternative dispute 

resolution services to minimize and/or resolve labor-management disputes, the FLRA’s 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 

their labor-management issues on their own, without needing third-party involvement. Both of 

these types of services have helped parties develop constructive workplace relationships that 

promote better mission performance as well as quality of work-life – real evidence that the 

program works.

During FY 2013, more than 80 percent of parties to negotiability cases filed with the FLRA 

voluntarily chose to resolve their differences using the CADRO’s services. Those parties 

successfully reached partial or total resolution in 100 percent of the cases that they brought to the 

FLRA, eliminating the need for the Authority to formally issue decisions to resolve nearly all of 

those cases. The CADRO also helped parties resolve exceptions to arbitration awards, sensitive 

collective-bargaining disputes, and other complex matters – some with far-reaching national 

implications. In one Department of Defense case, the parties presented the FLRA with 37 

disputed collective bargaining proposals. Using the FLRA’s online technology for secure video 

conferencing, document review, caucusing, and other critical functions, the CADRO successfully 

facilitated a full resolution of the case, working with parties in four locations in three states that 

were separated by 4,500 miles. And the resolution was accomplished quickly. In another case 

involving a civilian federal agency with significant national security responsibilities, through a 

series of face-to-face meetings, the CADRO assisted the parties in resolving a very complex and 

sensitive dispute involving 31 negotiability issues. In addition to the value of the substantive 

solutions achieved through the CADRO, both parties and the FLRA conserved significant 

resources as a result of this success.

In addition, during FY 2013, recognizing the significant success of both the OALJ’s Settlement 

Judge Program and the FLRA’s Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Program, the 

agency linked the two programs by aligning these important functions within one office. The 

CADRO now conducts settlement activities in ULP cases pending in the OALJ, and conducts 

interventions in negotiability and arbitration cases pending in the Authority, as well as 

continuing its facilitation and training work. In doing so, the CADRO resolved nearly 80 percent 

of ULP complaints in which parties chose to avail themselves of ADR services under the OALJ 

Settlement Judge Program. Noteworthy ULP and negotiability cases during FY 2013 included 

those that helped parties better focus resources on protecting the nation’s homeland, supporting 

our combat troops, serving veterans, preparing for national emergencies, maintaining safe skies, 

managing nuclear-weapon systems, furthering space exploration, providing immigration 
8

services, ensuring environmental protection, securing dangerous criminals, and protecting the 

food supply. 

Evidence from agencies and employee representatives continue to reaffirm that FLRA 

investment in ADR services that are delivered by the OALJ, the OGC, the FSIP, and the 

CADRO is a very cost-effective way to help parties improve the quality of work-life and prevent 

workplace problems from interfering with the delivery of government services to the American 

people. ADR reduces the need for costly litigation, improves labor-management relationships, 

and enhances agency performance by advancing the agency's mission and increasing 

effectiveness and efficiency.

Another key strategy resulting in more effective and efficient program performance for the 

FLRA, as well as the timely resolution of disputes for its customers, was the agency’s delivery of 

hundreds of training, outreach, and facilitation sessions in FY 2013 to thousands of practitioners. 

The agency also continued its engagement with the labor-management community by issuing 

numerous press releases sharing important information with its customers, participating in local 

and national forums informing the public about the FLRA and its significant contributions to 

making government work more effectively and efficiently, and holding focus groups on agency 

processes and procedures to assist in evaluating new and existing approaches to program 

delivery. Among the external initiatives that continued to be important in FY 2013 were training 

and education for labor and management representatives and others. Indeed, requests for 

training are received daily in all of the FLRA’s components, and this demand is expected to 

continue, if not increase. The FLRA’s innovative use of technology to deliver its training, 

outreach, and facilitation services has enabled the agency to maximize the delivery of its 

services, reaching hundreds of its customers right at their desks for free. The FLRA also 

continues to partner with federal agencies to identify training needs and resources to meet 

customer demands.

In 2010, the FLRA was named the Most Improved Small Agency by the Partnership for Public 

Service. Building upon this success in 2011, the agency once again placed among the top of the 

Most Improved Small Agencies. In 2012 and 2013, the FLRA continued to meet its commitment 

to increasing employee satisfaction and morale, capturing the #8 small agency ranking overall in 

the Best Places to Work in the Federal Government survey, reflecting a dramatic and 

unprecedented improvement of over 280 percent since 2009. The FLRA's achievements are 

particularly noteworthy given that, just three years prior, the agency placed last in the 2009 

survey. Most notable for 2013 were the FLRA’s rankings for certain “Best in Class” categories 

– ranking second overall in both Teamwork and Strategic Management, and third in Effective 

Leadership of Senior Leaders and Training and Development. The FLRA also ranks first with 

respect to Pay, and fifth in Performance-Based Rewards and Advancement. 
9

In a 2012 report issued by the Partnership analyzing agency’s 2011 scores, the FLRA was also 

recognized as the Most Improved Small Agency on Innovation. The FLRA’s 2011 innovation 

score of 67 percent exceeded the government-wide average of 63 percent. The report – which 

found that a 21st century federal government that effectively serves the needs of the American 

people must embrace transformation and inspire employees to seek continuous improvement –

recognizes the importance of leaders empowering employees to initiate change and reward them 

for their achievements. Given today’s budgetary constraints, federal employees and their 

agencies are being asked to deliver more with fewer resources, meaning that innovation will be a 

critical factor in achieving improved performance. The FLRA is pleased to be recognized for 

empowering its employees in this regard.

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

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

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

government-wide average of 53. Effective leadership is not only important for directing an 

organization’s operations and motivating the workforce, but also in guiding an organization 

through tough decisions about how to meet increased demand for services in a constrained 

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

agency's mission results and increasing program effectiveness and efficiency.

In 2013, the FLRA also continued its success in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, with 

an employee response rate of 84 percent – significantly greater than the government-wide rate of 

48 percent. The agency scored 73 percent in leadership and knowledge management, 66 percent 

in results-oriented performance culture, 72 percent in talent management, and 71 percent in job 

satisfaction – each exceeding the government-wide average. Consistent with an agency-wide 

focus on targeting challenges identified in the survey, the FLRA has renewed its commitment to 

address areas of weakness or concern in full collaboration with its employees at all levels.

The FLRA’s dramatic and sustained improvements over the last four and half years reflect the 

commitment of leadership to managing the agency with transparency and accountability and 

engaging employees at all levels, as well as the commitment and dedication of FLRA employees. 

Consistent with the significant increase in employee morale and satisfaction accomplished since 

0

20

40

60

80

100

2005 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Best Places to Work Score
10

2009 has been a significant, marked improvement in the FLRA's mission performance and 

delivery of services to its customers.
11

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

STRATEGIC AND PERFORMANCE PLANNING FRAMEWORK

Over the last four and a half years, through an on-going, comprehensive, agency-wide review of 

its operations, staffing, work processes, resource allocations, and performance by agency 

leadership and the Union of Authority Employees – the employees’ representative organization –

the FLRA has strategically planned for its future, and has established aggressive and challenging 

mission initiatives and performance indicators, maximizing the delivery of agency services 

throughout the federal government. The agency has continually improved its program 

performance by assessing and evaluating its performance outcomes to ensure that it is 

accomplishing its important mission of providing guidance in resolving labor-management 

disputes in the federal sector. 

The FLRA’s performance planning framework is based on the FY 2010 – 2015 Strategic Plan, 

and is supported by the Annual Performance Plan. The FLRA Performance Plan reflects the 

agency’s commitment to establishing measures that will enable it to assess performance 

outcomes, align resources, and effectively identify staffing and training needs for future years. 

The agency performance plan also demonstrates the FLRA’s on-going commitment to 

organizational excellence.

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 2015 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.
12

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. The core purpose of the

Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the 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 labormanagement relations are dependent on both the timely resolution of disputes and the engagement 

of federal employees and their union representatives as essential sources of front-line ideas and 

information about improvements in the delivery of government services.

The FLRA facilitates improvements in performance government-wide that will inevitably have an 

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

million employees represented by a labor organization. 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.

Alternative Dispute Resolution and Education

Throughout the years, the Authority, the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), and the Federal 

Service Impasses Panel (FSIP or the Panel), recognizing the tremendous benefits and cost-savings 

associated with using ADR to resolve workplace disputes, have integrated ADR techniques into all 

aspects of their case processing. Offering ADR services in pending unfair labor practices (ULP), 

representation, negotiability, and bargaining impasse disputes at every step – from investigation 

and prosecution to the adjudication of cases and resolution of bargaining impasses – results in 

parties having faster, mutually agreeable, and effective resolution of their disputes. More than 15 

years ago, the FLRA established the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Program to 

place even greater and more formalized emphasis on the use of ADR in the agency.

Throughout the years, all of the FLRA’s offices – the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute 

Resolution Office (CADRO), the OGC, the FSIP, and the Office of the Administrative Law Judges

(OALJ) – have successfully conducted interventions and engaged in settlement efforts in 

thousands of cases pending before the agency. In well over 80 percent of FLRA cases in FY 2013, 

these activities resulted in full resolution of the underlying dispute and closure of the pending case. 

To date, the FLRA has leveraged existing staff and resources to increase its ADR reach, partnering 
13

with other agencies – such as the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service and the Veterans 

Administration – to train large numbers of practitioners, and supporting labor-management forums 

pursuant to Executive Order 13522, Creating Labor-Management 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 agency 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 

agency case law, regulations, and case processing procedures. The FLRA delivers its educational 

materials through a variety of means – in-person training sessions, on-line meetings and training 

sessions, and various on-line resources – such as comprehensive web-based training modules, as 

well as outlines, manuals and guides 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 gets the parties back to work accomplishing their missions and 

delivering effective and efficient government services.

Information Technology

IT and automation are fundamental to ensuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the FLRA and

in meeting the agency’s 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 implementing electronic case filing (eFiling). The FLRA’s eFiling system, which was 

developed to provide easier, more user-friendly, and complete access to the FLRA and its 

services, is an important e-government initiative. More specifically, eFiling is expected to 

increase efficiency over time by reducing procedural-filing errors and resulting processing 

delays, and is yet another example of the FLRA’s ongoing efforts to better serve its customers 

and provide current, useful online tools for federal employees, the unions that represent them, 

and federal agencies for resolving issues under the Statute. The system will also provide the 

platform for agency development of an “end-to-end” electronic case file.

The FLRA’s ADR intervention efforts in pending negotiability cases have also been greatly 

enhanced through the use of technology, allowing staff to resolve large, complex negotiability 

cases with minimal cost. For example, the CADRO used Adobe Connect and other appropriate 

collaborative technology tools to enable video and audio conferencing, document sharing, and 

other functions for remote parties. As a result, the CADRO was able to successfully resolve 

disputes that involved parties who were in remote locations (including various locations in 

Alaska) without requiring either the CADRO representatives or the party representatives to 

travel. This innovative use of technology for parties in remote locations enabled the parties (and 

the FLRA) to achieve faster and higher-quality resolutions, while also resulting in significant 

savings to both the FLRA and the participating parties, and contributing to the efficient and 

effective accomplishment of the agency’s mission.
14

The FSIP also relies heavily on technology to increase efficiency in resolving cases. During FY 

2013, consistent with the practice it has adopted in previous years, the Panel conducted five of its 

eight business meetings via teleconference, linking Panel Members in the Chicago and Detroit 

areas with their colleagues and staff in Washington, DC, saving thousands of dollars in travel

and per diem expenses. In addition, Panel Members routinely conducted mediation-arbitration 

proceedings by telephone and/or video conference where on-site visual inspection of a facility 

was unnecessary to resolve impasses, avoiding the need for a Panel Member to travel to the 

location of a dispute or for the parties to send their representatives to the Panel’s offices.

Moreover, the OGC has incorporated technology into all aspects of its ULP and representation 

case investigations. The OGC frequently uses telephone and video conferencing in case 

investigations and settlement discussions. When voters are dispersed in a representation case 

election, for example, the OGC uses internet/telephone balloting procedures providing 

employees with around-the-clock access to voting. The office also uses video and telephone 

conferencing in representation case hearings involving remote or unavailable witnesses. 

In addition, the OGC has established a variety of web-based interactive training programs for the 

parties addressing such frequently raised topics as basic rights and responsibilities under the 

Statute, the impact of reorganizations on bargaining units, the statutory exclusions from 

bargaining units, and Executive Order 13522. The OGC has also established comprehensive, 

web-based case outlines for ULP and representation cases to go along with its operating 

manuals, policies, and guidance memoranda. These on-line materials provide the parties with 

ready access to the same materials that office staff rely on to process cases, promoting 

transparency and efficiency in the investigative process.

The agency has used technology in delivering other services as well. For example, all 

government agencies look to the FLRA as one of the lead training agencies concerning

Executive Order 13522, and the OGC and the CADRO have helped them overcome some of the 

initial hurdles of implementation. In FY 2013, the FLRA assisted representatives from labor and 

management that were dispersed in many locations across 1,500 miles. As a precursor to faceto-face meetings, the CADRO hosted an online meeting that enabled more than a dozen key 

leaders to obtain some basic training concerning the Order, share critical information, identify 

barriers preventing forward movement, agree to develop a labor-management forum charter, and 

schedule future meetings. As a result, communications were enhanced, travel costs were 

reduced, and the parties’ collaborative labor-management relationship strengthened. The parties 

are working together to develop ways to improve their mission performance.

Human Capital

The FLRA has made major gains in improving all aspects of employee work-life balance and in 

leveraging its highly engaged workforce to address agency matters ranging from the strategies 

and processes for the delivery of program services to internal agency operations, including 

performance management, IT, budgetary resources, and office space. Continuing its 

commitment to communicating and involving employees in mission performance and agency 

operations, the FLRA has established a true link between employee engagement and agency 

performance outcomes. 
15

Employee feedback received through various mediums, including the Office of Personnel 

Management’s (OPM) Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, continues to inform FLRA leaders 

about agency wellness from the perspective of its most valuable resource – its workforce. 

Employees understand the mission of the FLRA, understand their role in fulfilling the mission, 

and see themselves as an integral piece of achieving agency-wide success. By investing in its 

employees through classroom training, rotational details, cross-component learning, challenging 

assignments, and leadership development, FLRA employees continue to sharpen and broaden

their skills. In this connection, employees at all levels led and engaged in numerous missionrelated initiatives, including: the development of the FLRA’s bilingual webpages; a decisionwriting initiative intended to strengthen the quality of the Authority’s decisions; and the 

development of Authority and OGC training materials, guides, and manuals to educate and 

inform parties on the Statute and applicable legal standards, as well as the FLRA’s case 

processing procedures. 

With respect to performance management, employee recognition, accurate assessments, and ongoing meaningful discussions with supervisors are paramount to achieving agency performance 

results. To that end, the agency established better metrics to measure performance and 

productivity, and increased its use of non-monetary incentive awards to recognize employee 

achievement. FLRA managers and employees worked collectively to implement the agency’s 

new, multi-tier General Schedule Performance Management System, including implementation 

of an employee-facilitated ADR program for resolving performance management disputes and 

training on aspects of the system. Additionally, the FLRA was an early implementer of the 

government-wide Senior Executive Service performance appraisal system and received 

provisional certification of its system from the OPM. With implementation of the two new 

performance management systems, agency mission and goals are directly linked to performance 

from top to bottom. 

FY 2013 was a challenging year for the federal workforce, and FLRA employees faced the 

challenges head on, continuing to fulfill the FLRA’s mission. The FLRA was subject to 

sequestration like all agencies, yet at the same time, experienced an increase in demand for its 

services. The agency successfully managed sequestration, handling its increased caseload and 

reduced staffing levels by using creative, immediate solutions to address the challenges. The 

agency used self-directed work teams, collateral-duty assignments, and details from sisteragencies. The agency also realigned offices, developed staff internally for anticipated vacancies, 

made use of voluntary reassignments, updated position descriptions, developed career-ladder 

positions, and recruited internally and externally to meet long-term work requirements. In 

addition, the agency 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.

With a commitment to increasing diversity and inclusion (D&I), the agency has implemented its 

D&I Strategic Plan and metrics for assessing D&I success, reaffirming the FLRA’s dedication to 

fostering a workplace where employees from all backgrounds are recruited, retained, and 

developed for successful performance and career progression. Employee health and wellness 

programs have also continued at the FLRA. Employees are engaged in the community through 
16

pro-bono work, as well as various multi-cultural programs. The FLRA hosts a weekly yoga 

class, as well as monthly on-site nurse visits that include vision testing, cardiac risk profiling, 

blood pressure screening, and annual flu and whooping-cough shots. “Lunch & Learn” sessions 

on a variety of topics such as diabetes, acupuncture, and heart disease are offered to employees,

and periodic wellness tips are shared through the agency’s weekly internal newsletter, InSession. Human resources e-initiatives in FY 2013 included the successful implementation of a 

web-based time and attendance system to more efficiently capture employee time and attendance

and electronic approval of personnel actions.

GOAL 1: PROVIDE TIMELY REVIEW AND DISPOSITION OF UNFAIR 

LABOR PRACTICE CASES.

The General Counsel has responsibility for the investigation, settlement, and prosecution of ULP 

charges. All ULP proceedings originate with the filing of a charge in a Regional Office by an 

employee, labor organization, or agency. Once a charge has been filed, Regional Office staff 

will investigate the charge to determine if 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, DC. 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 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 1,587 1,811 1,453 1,488 1,570 1,570

Charges filed 4,398 4,094 4,375 4,659 4,600 4,600

Total caseload 5,985 5,905 5,828 6,147 6,170 6,170

Charges withdrawn/settled 3,141 3,425 3,377 3,646 3,634 3,634

Charges dismissed 751 812 732 673 690 690

Complaints issued 282 215 231 258 276 276

Total cases closed 4,174 4,452 4,340 4,577 4,600 4,600

Cases pending, end of year 1,811 1,453 1,488 1,570 1,570 1,570
17

OALJ 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 67 54 72 115 120 78

Cases received from the OGC 282 234 240 271 201 201

Total caseload 349 288 312 386 321 279

Settlements before hearing 275 191 176 222 237 237

Settlements during hearing 0 0 1 1 0 0

Cases closed by decision 20 25 20 43 6 6

Total cases closed 295 216 197 266 243 243

Cases pending, end of year 54 72 115 120 78 36

Authority 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 14 14 6 2 12 3

Exceptions filed 18 17 20 27 6 6

Total caseload 32 31 26 29 18 9

Cases closed procedurally 9 13 16 16 9 5

Cases closed based on merits 9 12 8 1 6 4

Total cases closed 18 25 24 17 15 9

Cases pending, end of year 14 6 2 12 3 0

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

49% 54% 61% 68% 65% 65%

The OGC has increased its FY 2014 target for this measure from 62 percent to 65 percent, based 

on actual performance in FY 2013.

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

31% 97%/100% 99%/100% 100%/100% 90%/100% 90%/100%
18

In FY 2011, an additional target was established to measure the percentage of decisions on 

appeal issued within 120 days (100 percent).

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 95% 90% 86% 90% 90%

This measure was established in FY 2011, as a consolidation of two previous 90-day measures 

into one of 180 days.

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

Authority Member.

Results Targets

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

18% 31% 75% 100% 60% 60%

The Authority was without a quorum of Members to decide cases from January 2013 through 

November 2013. As a result, it will begin FY 2014 with a much larger number of pending cases 

than previously expected. As the full Authority attempts to issue the “oldest” pending cases in 

FY 2014, however, a number of other cases will likely go “overage” in the process. To take this 

situation into account, the Authority has reduced its FY 2014 target for this measure from 80 

percent to 60 percent.

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, labor organization, or 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 hearing to resolve disputed factual matters. The Regional Director then issues a 

Decision and Order determining the appropriate unit, directing an election, dismissing the 
19

petition, or making other disposition of the matter. The Regional Director’s Decision and Order 

is final unless an application for review is filed with the Authority.

OGC 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 104 102 82 70 62 62

Petitions filed 278 267 271 240 240 240

Total caseload 382 369 353 310 302 302

Petitions withdrawn 113 126 115 106 103 103

Cases closed based on merits 167 161 168 142 137 137

Total cases closed 280 287 283 248 240 240

Cases pending, end of year 102 82 70 62 62 62

Authority 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 5 6 6 0 9 9

Applications for review 15 12 6 11 21 21

Total caseload 20 18 12 11 30 30

Cases closed procedurally 1 0 0 1 6 6

Cases closed based on merits 13 12 12 1 15 15

Total cases closed 14 12 12 2 21 21

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

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

65% 60% 62% 60% 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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
20

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 

been filed to determine if 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 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 247 173 66 40 123 102

Exceptions filed 134 110 107 124 72 72

Total caseload 381 283 173 164 195 174

Cases closed procedurally 31 22 24 19 18 18

Cases closed based on merits 177 195 109 22 75 75

Total cases closed 208 217 133 41 93 93

Cases pending, end of year 173 66 40 123 102 81

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

Authority Member.

Results Targets

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

30% 33% 58% 91% 60% 60%

From January 2013 through November 2013, the Authority was without a quorum of Members 

to decide cases. As a result, it will begin FY 2014 with a much larger number of pending cases 

than previously expected. As the full Authority attempts to issue the “oldest” pending cases in 

FY 2014, however, a number of other cases will likely go “overage” in the process. To take this 

situation into account, the Authority has reduced its FY 2014 target for this measure from 80 

percent to 60 percent.

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 
21

agency regulation for which there is a compelling need. In these cases, a union may petition the 

Authority to resolve the negotiability dispute.

Authority 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014 

Est.

2015 

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 39 22 15 8 9 45

Petitions filed 52 39 45 30 57 57

Total caseload 91 61 60 38 66 102

Cases closed procedurally 46 33 38 27 21 21

Cases closed based on merits 23 13 14 2 0 0

Total cases closed 69 46 52 29 21 21

Cases pending, end of year 22 15 8 9 45 81

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

17% 29% 50% 100% 60% 60%

The Authority was without a quorum of Members to decide cases from January 2013 through 

November 2013. As a result, it will begin FY 2014 with a much larger number of pending cases 

than previously expected. As the full Authority attempts to issue the “oldest” pending cases in 

FY 2014, however, a number of other cases will likely go “overage” in the process. To take this 

situation into account, the Authority has reduced its FY 2014 target for this measure from 80 

percent to 60 percent.

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 Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service; or seek the assistance 

of the FSIP in resolving the negotiation impasse, but only after the previous attempts have failed.
22

FSIP 2010 2011 2012 2013

2014

Est.

2015

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 69 36 53 38 40 30

Impasses filed 143 152 176 194 150 158

Total caseload 212 188 229 232 190 188

Cases closed 176 135 191 192 160 160

Cases pending, end of year 36 53 38 40 30 28

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 64% 92% 95% 80% 80%

The performance measures for the FSIP were completely revised in FY 2011 to concisely set 

forth timeliness targets for the Panel’s three most important categories of case disposition.

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 79% 86% 97% 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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 65% 77% 87% 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 significantly expanded its training, outreach, and facilitation activities since FY 2011. ADR 
23

is an informal process that allows parties to discuss and develop their interests in order to resolve 

the underlying issues and problems in their relationship. 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.

This performance goal was established in FY 2011 to emphasize the importance of using 

collaboration and ADR techniques along with other training, outreach, and facilitation services to 

assist the parties in minimizing and resolving labor-management disputes. The goal 

encompasses all three FLRA components.

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 87% 97% 98% 95% 95%

The OGC has increased its FY 2014 target for this measure from 90 percent to 95 percent, based 

on actual performance in FY 2013.

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 88% 80% 78% 80% 80%

The OALJ has reduced its FY 2014 target for this measure from 85 percent to 80 percent, based 

on actual performance in FY 2013.

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 93% 91% 100% 95% 95%

The OGC has increased its FY 2014 target for this measure as well, based on actual performance 

in FY 2013, from 90 percent to 95 percent.
24

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 100% N/A 100% 75% 80%

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

by the parties. The ADR process concerning that case was still ongoing at the end of the fiscal 

year. As a result, this performance measure, which tracks the partial or total resolution of 

accepted cases, did not apply in FY 2012.

Measure 6.5: Percentage of negotiability cases in which an offer of ADR services is accepted 

by the parties that are partially or totally resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 87% 100% 100% 90% 90%

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 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 29% 32% 28% 30% 30%

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

Results Targets

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 332 221 302 200 200

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

activities.

Results Targets

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015

N/A 11,975 8,933 5,976 6,000 6,000

Much of the demand for training, outreach, and facilitation activities in FY 2011 and FY 2012 

was for overview training on instituting forums and pre-decisional involvement under Executive 

Order 13522. Since 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 training, outreach, and 
25

facilitation services in FY 2014 and FY 2015 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’s Case Management System (CMS) was implemented in FY 2011, and since that 

time, the agency has steadily built the capacity for eFiling) in all agency components, as well as 

development of a complete electronic case file. The FLRA has met its key milestones, and it is 

poised to have its customers maximize use of the eFiling system, significantly enhancing the 

quality of parties’ filings and reducing procedural deficiencies. In addition, the FLRA intends to 

fully implement an “end-to-end” electronic case file, streamlining the processing and handling of 

agency case files. 

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

Results

FY 2010 Implemented the new Case Management System for all three FLRA 

components.

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%

Targets

FY 2014 25%

FY 2015 50%

The FY 2014 target for this measure has been revised based on experience following the first full 

year in which eFiling was available to customers. Moving forward, consistent with integration 

of the CMS and eFiling systems, the FLRA will explore strategies for encouraging and 

increasing customer use of the system.

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

Results

FY 2010 N/A

FY 2011 N/A

FY 2012

Enhanced the Case Management System to provide the structure that supports 

end-to-end electronic case processing.

FY 2013 Conducted a pilot program on end-to-end case processing.
26

Targets

FY 2014 Migrate one FLRA component to end-to-end case processing.

FY 2015 Complete 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.

The FLRA, in consultation with the FLRA Labor-Management Forum, has continued to make

major gains in terms of developing, managing, and utilizing human capital. Continued growth in 

the use of the alternative work schedule program allows employees to better balance their 

personal lives with the demands of their work. Implementation of an electronic time and 

attendance system resulted in time and attendance recording and submission more accurate and 

efficient. Succession planning continues to be a major area of concern for the FLRA. 

Developmental details for attorneys allow for the individual development of those who 

participate, and also allow the agency to manage workloads, reduced staffing, and succession 

planning more strategically. The agency’s performance management and awards policies were 

revised, and the agency now assesses employee performance on a five-tiered scale rather than a 

pass-fail. The policy revisions have continued to make performance review more meaningful, 

and ensured that awards are distributed on the basis of merit. The FLRA is continually assessing 

the training needs of its workforce, focusing not only on mission-critical skills, but also on 

human capital and performance management development. The results from these assessments 

have played a role in targeting training funds to the areas employees and supervisors deem most 

in need of development.

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

achieve results.

Results

FY 2010

Increased staffing levels in each program area; improved employee worklife

balance through implementation of a robust telework program and videoconferencing, which reduces travel costs and time away from family; 

implemented an employee leadership developmental initiative in the OGC; 

and implemented a Student Temporary Employment Program. Also began 

human capital e-initiatives to improve hiring through the purchase of 

USAStaffing (an automated hiring system), which engages the hiring 

manager in all aspects of the hiring process, reduces time-to-hire metrics, and 

improves applicants’ Federal hiring experience.
27

FY 2011

The FLRA continued to focus on employee engagement in FY 2011. Its 

Labor-Management Forum updated the 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. The agency also formed a joint labormanagement workgroup to design a new Performance Management System 

for General Schedule employees for Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 

approval and agency implementation; an employee workgroup also designed 

and submitted to OPM for approval a revised Senior Executive Service (SES) 

appraisal system. Consistent with the Human Capital Strategic Plan, FLRA 

developed a training needs assessment, which will be used to create 

individual development plans to address areas needing skills improvement 

and to further increase mission-critical competencies. Additionally, the 

agency supported employee ideas, initiatives, and employee-focused 

programs, such as “Bring Your Child to Work” day, Public Service 

Recognition Week, a health benefits fair, and a blood drive. FLRA also 

initiated brown-bag programs and an educational series to inform and develop 

employees in a casual setting. Human capital e-initiatives continued with the 

successful implementation of USAStaffing, NBC’s DataMart reporting tool, 

and employee eOPFs.

FY 2012

Enhanced development offerings to include competency-based training, 

career-ladder developmental programs, and continuation of HR workshops 

and educational brown-bags. A Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan was 

launched to make the agency a more inclusive and inviting workplace for all 

of its employees. Hiring of summer student interns, in some cases using 

targeted minority hiring strategies, also increased the FLRA’s diversity. 

Developmental offerings were expanded to include attorney details within the 

FLRA.

FY 2013

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. Established an ADR process for resolving performance 

issues. As a part of its strategic workforce planning efforts, continued 

employee development, including attorney details to other offices, ADR 

facilitator training, 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.

Targets

FY 2014

Focus on succession planning, including diversity and inclusion, in light of 

current retirement projections. Continue to develop employees strategically 

in accordance with agency needs and individual development plans. Assess 

progress to date on the overall agency human capital plan and its initiatives.

FY 2015

Implement a fully automated and integrated system for personnel actions. 

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 and reducing employee response times 
28

to general inquiries. Work with managers to increase diversity in targeted 

occupations.
29

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, 

[$25,500,000] $25,548,000: 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, 2014.)

APPROPRIATION REQUEST

The FLRA requests $25,548,000 in FY 2015 to fund employee salaries and related operating 

expenses. The agency’s FY 2015 request would fund 134 full-time equivalents (FTEs), the same 

level as in FY 2014. 

(In thousands of dollars)

Program Activity

FY 2013 

Actual

FY 2014 

Estimate

FY 2015 

Request

Change 

from 

FY 2014

Authority $12,771 $13,696 $13,704 $8

Office of the General Counsel 9,876 10,909 10,915 6

Federal Service Impasses Panel 747 928 929 1

Direct Obligations $23,394 $25,533 $25,548 $15

FTEs 120 134 134 0

Note: FY 2013 includes an across-the-board rescission of $49,446 and sequester of $1,243,715. The FY 2013 and FY 

2014 estimates include $31,000 and $33,000, respectively, in carryover funding from the prior year.

The requested FY 2015 funding level incorporates printing and information technology (IT) costsavings measures initiated over the past few years. The launch of the FLRA’s modernized 
30

website and continual enhancements to the site 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 memorandums, policy documents, and legal training and 

resources. Providing this information historically involved costly printing and publication costs, 

which have since been eliminated.

Furthermore, the requested FY 2015 funding level reflects a nearly 60 percent decrease in 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.

The agency also places 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, over 65 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.” 

Consistent with the growing participation in the FLRA telework program, the agency intends to 

reduce the size of its Headquarters by approximately 12,000 square feet by the end of FY 2014. 

Despite reducing its overall space footprint, however, no savings is expected, as the Washington, 

DC market rate continues to rise.

CHANGE FROM FY 2014

The FY 2015 request includes an increase of $294,000 over FY 2014 to provide for one percent 

employee pay raises in January 2014 and January 2015, and to cover the agency’s ongoing 

transition to the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). Additional FY 2015 personnel 

costs have been virtually offset, however, by $196,000 in anticipated savings from backfilling 

vacant positions over the next two years at lower levels. An additional $83,000 in savings is 

expected from terminating the FLRA’s current contract for administrative support services. The 

net increase over FY 2014, therefore, is only $15,000.

It is also 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 price increases for other FY 2015 contractual goods and services within current 

resource levels.

Personnel Compensation and Benefits

Nearly 80 percent of the FLRA’s funding is dedicated to employee compensation and benefits. 

In FY 2009, the agency embarked on a multi-year rebuilding effort to achieve sorely needed

performance and employee morale improvements. Through the reallocation of existing funds, 

the FLRA was able to adequately staff the Authority to ensure that appropriate resources were 

available to address its case backlog at the time. As vacancies arose throughout FY 2010, the 

agency reallocated additional resources to rebuild capacity in the Office of the General Counsel 

(OGC) and its management support offices. The reallocation of resources has in part resulted in 
31

the FLRA meeting or substantially meeting its organizational performance goals for the last four 

fiscal years. As reduced funding levels become the norm in the federal government, the FLRA 

will continue to assess the status of resources throughout the agency and to strategically 

reallocate funding to maximize organizational and program performance. The agency’s ability 

to reallocate staffing resources in order to make additional performance gains or to address 

infrastructure needs, however, would be significantly hampered if forced to absorb a reduction in 

funding in FY 2015.

Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) filings have increased by 30 percent in the OGC since FY 2008. 

The many management changes that have resulted from passage of the Budget Control Act and 

President Obama’s efforts to reorganize the federal government have been accompanied by an 

increased incidence of bargaining obligations, which has resulted in parties filing more ULP 

charges. A reduction in funding in the OGC would likely result in delays or denials of the 

office’s ability to timely and effectively resolve labor-management relations disputes.

In addition, OGC agents are directly involved in providing parties with alternative dispute 

resolution (ADR) and educational services. These functions play a key role in resolving cases 

timely, as well as preventing and reducing future disputes. The OGC’s ability to provide these 

services would be hampered by a loss in funding, given the already small number of agents 

available to provide these important services.

Since FY 2008, there has also been a 75 percent increase in the number of requests for assistance 

from the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP or the Panel). The trend accelerated in FY 2013, 

as the Panel received over 40 requests for assistance over the impact and implementation of 

administrative furloughs due to sequestration, in addition to its normal caseload. A reduction in 

funding in the FSIP would severely inhibit its ability to react quickly to disputes where delay can 

be costly, and require the Panel to decline invitations to provide vitally necessary training to its 

customers.

In certain types of cases, such as office relocations, a delay in processing times can have 

immediate economic effects on agencies and taxpayers, such as having to pay rent at two 

locations while waiting for the Panel to resolve the impasse. In another large category of cases, 

the Panel is obligated under the Federal Employees Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules 

Act (the Act) to resolve impasses over the termination of alternative work schedules within 60 

calendar days. A reduction in funding in the FSIP would mean delays in resolving other cases 

while the Panel strives to meet the Act’s 60-day mandate. The FSIP also has jurisdiction over 

agency determinations that existing alternative work schedules are causing reductions in 

productivity, diminishment in the level of services furnished to the public, and/or unnecessary 

increases in cost. The law requires the Panel to resolve such impasses in 60 days.

Furthermore, the Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO) has 

increased its involvement in arbitration cases in FY 2014, and assumed settlement judge duties 

for the Office of the Administrative Law Judges (OALJ). With respect to the former, the 

CADRO has become more active in arbitration cases – previously the office only contacted

parties in arbitration cases where they affirmatively asserted an interest in CADRO services. 

The office now contacts parties in every arbitration case, as it does in negotiability cases. As 
32

with negotiability cases, this will reduce the number of cases requiring a decision from the 

Authority, thereby reducing the Authority’s docket and allowing for faster resolution of 

arbitration cases.

OALJ settlement judge responsibilities transitioned to the CADRO in FY 2013, aligning an 

important aspect of the agency’s ADR work within one office. The CADRO is now responsible 

for ULP settlement cases in the OALJ and negotiability and arbitration intervention cases in the 

Authority, as well as continuing its facilitation and training work. Transitioning the settlement 

judge position to the CADRO requires additional staff for drafting OALJ decisions – duties that 

the settlement judge previously performed – and accordingly, the FLRA intends to establish a 

new entry-level attorney position in the OALJ in FY 2014. The position will be responsible for 

drafting OALJ decisions only, similar to attorneys on the Authority Members’ staffs. The 

agency’s increased involvement of the CADRO in arbitration cases will need to be reassessed, if 

funding to sustain the initiative was not provided in FY 2015.

The FY 2015 requested level includes an additional $203,000 to cover statutory pay raises of one 

percent in both FY 2014 and FY 2015. Furthermore, FLRA benefit costs, as a percentage of 

compensation, continue to rise as the percentage of the agency’s workforce under the 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 employees cost the 

FLRA, on average, twice as much in benefits as CSRS employees. The agency’s personnel 

benefits estimate, therefore, assumes that the on-going, government-wide transition to the FERS 

will cost the FLRA an additional $91,000 in FY 2015, including the scheduled increase in 

agency contributions. As previously mentioned, these additional FY 2015 compensation and 

benefit costs have been virtually offset by $196,000 in expected savings from backfilling future 

vacancies at lower levels.

Contractual Services

The demands for basic administrative services continue to grow along with the FLRA’s 

increased delivery of services, training, and facilitation. The agency intends to convert its

current contract for administrative services to a new entry-level support services specialist 

position in FY 2014. The position will provide support across all offices and, accordingly, will 

be more appropriately integrated into the agency’s long-term staffing plan. The additional salary 

and benefit costs are expected to be offset by $83,000 in FY 2015 by terminating the FLRA’s 

current contract for administrative support services.

Without the funding to sustain the new position in FY 2015, however, mission employees would 

be forced to assume the requirements of the position themselves. Furthermore, the FLRA 

intends to consolidate its Headquarters office space from three to two floors by the end of FY 

2014. Moving furniture and files internally would likely require contractual moving services, 

potentially negating any further savings from eliminating the full-time support services position.
33

PROGRAM AND FINANCING SCHEDULE

(In thousands of dollars)

FY 2013 

Actual

FY 2014 

Estimate

FY 2015 

Request

Obligations by program activity:

Authority $12,799 $13,721 $13,704

Office of the General Counsel 9,898 10,979 10,915

Federal Service Impasses Panel 747 933 929

Total new obligations 23,444 25,633 25,548

Budgetary resources:

Unobligated balance:

Nonexpenditure transfers:

Unobligated balance transfers between 

expired and unexpired accounts 31 33 0

Budget authority:

Appropriations, discretionary:

Appropriation 24,723 25,500 25,548

Appropriation permanently reduced (1,293) 0 0

Spending authority from offsetting collections 

(gross) 50 100 0

Total budgetary resources available 23,511 25,633 25,548

Change in obligated balance:

Unpaid obligations:

Unpaid obligations, brought forward, Oct. 1 2,693 2,588 2,588

Obligations incurred, unexpired accounts 23,444 25,633 25,548

Outlays (gross) (23,320) (25,633) (25,548)

Recoveries of prior-year unpaid obligations, 

expired (229) 0 0

Unpaid obligations, end of year 2,588 2,588 2,588

Budget authority and outlays, net:

Discretionary:

Budget authority, gross 23,477 25,633 25,548

Outlays, gross:

Outlays from new discretionary authority 21,086 23,070 22,993

Outlays from discretionary balances 2,234 2,563 2,555

Outlays, gross (total) 23,320 25,633 25,548

Budget authority, net (total) 23,430 25,533 25,548

Outlays, net (total) $23,262 25,533 25,548
34

OBJECT CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE

(In Thousands of dollars)

FY 2013 

Actual

FY 2014 

Estimate

FY 2015 

Request

Direct obligations:

Personnel compensation:

Full-time permanent $13,358 $14,767 $14,796

Other than full-time permanent 579 840 848

Other personnel compensation 4 232 236

Total personnel compensation 13,941 15,839 15,880

Civilian personnel benefits 3,791 4,388 4,445

Benefits for former personnel 1 0 0

Travel and transportation of persons 185 220 220

Transportation of things 11 11 11

Rental payments to GSA 2,555 2,664 2,664

Rental payments to others 9 19 19

Communications, utilities, and misc. charges 378 357 357

Printing and reproduction 8 11 11

Other services from non-federal sources 1,018 650 567

Other goods and services from federal sources 1,067 966 966

Operation and maintenance of facilities 4 5 5

Operation and maintenance of equipment 102 146 146

Supplies and materials 86 102 102

Equipment 238 155 155

Direct obligations 23,394 25,533 25,548

Reimbursable obligations:

Total personnel compensation 23 0

Travel and transportation of persons 27 100 0

Reimbursable obligations 50 100 0

Total new obligations $23,444 $25,633 $25,548

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY SCHEDULE

FY 2013 

Actual

FY 2014

Estimate

FY 2015 

Request

Direct civilian full-time equivalent employment 120 134 134
35

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, 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 these 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 IG 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 2015 funding request includes $416,000 for the OIG. The funding level 

requested by the IG, including $5,000 for training and $1,000 to support the Council of the 

Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, has been funded in total. The IG has certified 

that the FLRA’s funding request for the OIG satisfies all training requirements for FY 2015.
36

 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20424-0001

INSPECTOR GENERAL

July 12, 2013

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 2015:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
37

 The aggregate budget request for the operations of the OIG is $415,700.

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

 The portion of this amount needed to support the CIGIE is $1,200.

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 2015.

Inspector General

Federal Labor Relations Authority
38

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

1400 K Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20424

www.flra.gov