.

WWW.FLRA.GOV 

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

Promoting and protecting labor-management relations

for effective, efficient Government.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET 

JUSTIFICATION
This page intentionally left blank.
UNITED STATES

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

Congressional Budget Justification

Fiscal Year 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................6

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY .........................................................................9

BACKGROUND AND MISSION............................................................................................................9

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE.......................................................................................................9

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART........................................................................................................................10

THE AUTHORITY .....................................................................................................................................11

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)............................................................................................11

FEDERAL SERVICE IMPASSES PANEL (FSIP) ..........................................................................................12

AGENCY TRENDS & CHALLENGES.................................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................12

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL .......................................................................................................15

AUTHORITY .............................................................................................................................................17

Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ).......................................................................................................18

Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO)....................................................................19

Office of the Executive Director..........................................................................................................................21

CURRENT SERVICES ESTIMATE.....................................................................................................22

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION ..................................................................................................................23

APPROPRIATIONS LANGUAGE..................................................................................................................23

2024 FUNDING REQUEST........................................................................................................................23

PROGRAM AND FINANCING SCHEDULE ...................................................................................................24

OBJECT CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE......................................................................................................25

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY SCHEDULE......................................................................................................25

INSPECTOR GENERAL RESOURCES..........................................................................................................26

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN ......................................................................................................29

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: WE WILL RESOLVE DISPUTES UNDER THE FEDERAL SERVICE

LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE IN A TIMELY, HIGH-QUALITY, AND

IMPARTIAL MANNER.........................................................................................................................30

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: WE WILL PROMOTE STABILITY IN THE FEDERAL LABORMANAGEMENT COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING LEADERSHIP AND GUIDANCE THROUGH

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND EDUCATION .......................................................50

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: WE WILL MANAGE OUR RESOURCES EFFECTIVELY AND

EFFICIENTLY IN ORDER TOACHIEVE ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE............................55
6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) is pleased to present its 2024

Congressional Budget Justification in the amount of $33,737,000.

FLRA is an independent Federal agency created by Title VII of the Civil Service Reform Act of 

1978, also known as the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), 

5 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7135. FLRA is a small agency with a large mission: overseeing the labormanagement programs of most agencies in the Federal Government. Thus, FLRA is the rare 

type of agency whose performance actually affects other Federal agencies. Specifically, if FLRA 

is not able to resolve or help prevent agency and union labor disputes in a timely, effective 

manner, then that can have negative rippling effects on mission performance throughout the 

rest of the Federal Government.

In 2024, FLRA planned to be concluding a multiyear Agency restoration which began in 2021. 

This planned restoration was preceded by two decades of flat funding, at best, where inflation 

consistently reduced our ability to afford full-time equivalents (FTEs) – resulting in FLRA 

being down almost 100 FTEs from 20 years ago. For the last two years, FLRA has been dealing 

with: 

• An inherited inventory of 494 complaints, created by the nearly four-year absence of an

FLRA General Counsel (GC) and the resulting inability to issue unfair labor practice 

(ULP) complaints;

• The re-establishment of FLRA’s highly successful Collaboration and Alternative 

Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO), after it was dismantled in 2018; 

• A lack of experienced OGC staff, due to departures when FLRA closed its Dallas and 

Boston Regional Offices; and

• An upsurge in new ULP and REP case filings.

FLRA’s multiyear restoration plan was designed so that, each year, FLRA would build on the

prior year’s enacted budget at requested levels – with the ultimate result that, in FY24, FLRA 

would return to a normal state of operations and be able to provide the level of service that its 

parties expect and deserve.

The first year of the restoration plan – FY22 – was designed to enable FLRA to effectively 

“stop the bleeding” and address the four issues set forth above.

• If funded at the requested level, FLRA estimated it could have afforded 131 FTEs in FY22.

The second year of the restoration plan – FY23 – was intended to build on those efforts, enable 

the OGC to reduce the inherited inventory of complaints, as well as the backlog of newly-
7

authorized complaints,1 and keep pace with the growing number of newly filed ULP charges 

and representation (REP) petitions, and for FLRA to further reverse delays in case processing.

• If funded at the requested level, FLRA estimated it could have afforded 135 FTEs in FY23.

The final year of the restoration plan – FY24 – was intended to be the year when FLRA 

returned to a fully-functioning state, with respect to not only FTEs, but also case processing, 

updating outdated regulations and information-technology systems, as well as providing more 

dispute-resolution services, training, and other educational tools to our parties. Minimal gains 

were realized because FLRA was funded at less than the requested levels each year, and 

inflation and employee pay raises exhausted most of the additional funding provided. FLRA 

has remained at the same FY21 FTE level – 116 – and has depended on hiring lags to afford 

even that number of FTEs.

Therefore, for FY24, we are effectively still in the “first year” of our restoration plan. FLRA is 

requesting $33,737,000. If funded at this level, considering the continued rise in salaries and 

other costs, FLRA can afford only 125 FTEs (lower than what was requested in the FY22

CBJ).2

• If funded at requested level, FLRA estimates it can afford 125 FTEs in FY24.

The FLRA is in critical condition. It is more imperative than ever that FLRA receive its full 

FY24 request to restore staffing to a level at which FLRA can minimally function. Without 

this, OGC’s backlog of newly authorized complaints, which developed while it was dealing with 

the inherited inventory of 494 complaints, will continue to grow.

We have seen, and continue to anticipate, increases in new case filings in many areas. 

President Biden’s Executive Order 14003, “Protecting the Federal Workforce” and OPM’s

“Guidance for Implementation of Executive Order 14003 - Protecting the Federal Workforce”, 

direct agencies to revise any collective bargaining agreements implementing Executive Order 

13836. As a result of this and other factors, FLRA’s workload is surging, including significant 

increases in requests for training, facilitation, and relationship-building assistance.

Additionally, pursuant to Executive Order 14025 and the associated White House Task Force 

on Worker Organizing and Empowerment, FLRA has been working with the Federal 

Mediation and Conciliation Service to provide training and other services related to employee 

organizing. In FY24, FLRA anticipates a third surge of new REP petition filings due to OPM’s 

issuance of “Guidance on Implementation of EO 14025: Addressing Whether Non-Bargaining 

Unit Positions are Correctly Excluded from Bargaining Unit Coverage.” Only FLRA may 

determine bargaining units, including which positions are included, or not, in the unit. 

Inclusion in a bargaining unit entitles an employee to union representation. OGC Regional 

Offices, on delegation from the Authority, process petitions filed by employees, agencies, or 

labor organizations, to conduct elections to determine bargaining units or to clarify those units 

 

1 While working on the inherited inventory of 494 complaints and necessarily prioritizing those over new 

complaints, a backlog of newly authorized complaints has developed. 2 The average annualized cost of an FTE at FLRA in FY23 is $199,000 and FY24 is $212,000.
8

already certified. This new surge in REP work, on top of eliminating the inherited inventory 

and newly authorized complaints, cries out for additional FTEs for the OGC.

CADRO – the Authority’s alternative-dispute-resolution office – will continue to play a vital 

role in many of these efforts, including resolving disputes that come before the FLRA and 

preventing future disputes from occurring. CADRO resolves matters in a manner that is often

timelier and more cost-effective than traditional litigation. However, with only two FTE, 

CADRO will be unable to keep pace with the surge of work facing it. Therefore, in FY24, FLRA 

has made it a priority to restore a third FTE – that had been eliminated in 2017 – to CADRO.

In FY 2004, FLRA’s enacted budget was $29,611,000; in 

FY23 it is $29,400,000, less than almost twenty years ago

and much less when adjusted for inflation. 

Throughout these years, FLRA’s mission has remained the 

same, and its responsibilities and workload have only 

grown. FLRA has survived by virtually eliminating face-toface interactions with the employee, agency, and union 

representatives that we serve; making, what were thought 

to be temporary, cost cuts in every budget area; closing two 

Regional Offices and losing FTEs from those Regions; and, in largest part, by reducing staff 

levels through attrition and not filling the vacated positions.

Initially, litigation of the complaints mentioned above was done virtually. However, post 

pandemic, more litigation is expected to be done in-person, which will require FLRA to pay 

travel expenses for Administrative Law Judges (ALJ), OGC trial attorneys, and witnesses

appearing at trial before ALJs. In addition, FLRA has seen a surge in parties’ requests for inperson training. Although FLRA has again begun to provide such training for its parties, there 

are limitations on FLRA’s ability to accept travel reimbursement from some parties. FLRA’s 

limited travel budget does not currently fully support on-site trials or allow FLRA to keep up 

with the demand for training. Thus, fully funding FLRA’s travel budget will be vital to enable

FLRA to enforce the Statute and provide these in-demand training services.

Still, FLRA’s greatest asset, and greatest cost, has always been its FTEs – about 80 percent of 

the agency’s annual budget – and, with enacted levels below the President’s Budget request,

the Agency simply has not been able to afford the FTEs it needs to fully carry out its mission.

Despite the challenges our dedicated employees have faced, FLRA has seen its ranking in the 

Best Places to Work in the Federal Government rankings jump from the bottom two in 2018 

and 2019 to the seventh best small agency to work for in 2021 – making FLRA the secondmost-improved small agency in the Federal government. 

At the same time, FLRA’s employees are pushed to their limits in a way that is unsustainable 

in the short and long term. This budget request is crucial if FLRA is to become an efficient

agency again. Compared to the reduction in enacted FLRA funding over the course of the last 

twenty years, FLRA’s FY24 request is well below the funding level we would be at, even if only 

given yearly budget increases simply based on inflation. It is past time to make the proper 

investment in FLRA.
9

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

BACKGROUND AND MISSION

The U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) and its small staff of 116 full-time 

equivalents (FTEs) is responsible for establishing policies and guidance regarding the labormanagement-relations program for 2.1 million non-Postal, Federal employees worldwide, 

approximately 1.2 million (60 percent) of whom are represented in 2,200 bargaining units. 

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

Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).

The Agency’s genesis dates from the issuance of Executive Order 10988 by President Kennedy 

in 1962, 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-managementrelations 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 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.

FLRA’s mission is to exercise leadership in preventing and resolving labor-management 

disputes, giving full effect to the collective-bargaining rights of employees, unions, and 

agencies. Although FLRA is a small agency, accomplishing its mission in an effective and 

efficient manner is key to enabling the Federal Government, as a whole, to adapt to changing 

circumstances, as necessary, to continue delivering the highest quality services to the 

American public, and to deliver a nimbler, more innovative Federal Government. FLRA does 

not initiate cases; all proceedings before FLRA originate from filings by Federal agencies and 

employees, or labor organizations which represent federal employees. If a labor-management 

dispute remains unresolved for too long, then mission accomplishment at the affected agencies 

likely will suffer. In many ways, FLRA provides the grease for the wheels of government. As 

such, its influence is important beyond its size.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

FLRA consists of the Authority, the Office of the General Counsel (OGC), and the Federal 

Service Impasses Panel (FSIP). The Agency also provides full staff support to two other 

organizations, the Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and the Foreign Service Labor 

Relations Board.
10

Organizational Chart
11

The Authority

The Authority, FLRA’s bipartisan, adjudicatory body, comprises three full-time Members 

appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Members are

appointed for fixed, five-year, staggered terms, and the President designates one Member to 

serve as Chairman. The Chairman acts as the Agency’s chief executive and administrative 

officer.

The Authority, first and foremost, is directed to “provide leadership in establishing policies 

and guidance” related to the purposes of the Statute. The Authority is specifically empowered 

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

exceptions to grievance-arbitration awards; determine whether conduct alleged in a complaint 

constitutes an unfair labor practice (ULP); and review decisions of Regional Directors in 

representation (REP) disputes over bargaining unit determinations and elections. The 

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

recommended decisions in cases involving ULP complaints. The ALJs’ recommended decisions 

may be appealed to the Authority.

Other offices and programs under the Authority’s jurisdiction include the Office of the 

Executive Director, Office of the Solicitor, Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ), 

Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO), Office of Case Intake and 

Publication (CIP), and the Equal Employment Opportunity Program (EEO). The Office of 

Inspector General (OIG) stands as an independent entity within the Authority.

Office of the General Counsel (OGC)

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

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

General Counsel has sole responsibility over the investigation and prosecution of ULP charges 

and complaints. The General Counsel’s determinations in these matters are final and 

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

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

The General Counsel has a small staff at FLRA Headquarters (4 FTE), located in Washington, 

D.C. Headquarters management provides administrative oversight; develops policies, 

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

Offices; provides training and education for the parties; and processes appeals from the 

Regional Offices’ dismissals of ULP charges. Each Regional Office is headed by a Regional 

Director who provides leadership and management expertise for their respective Regions. 

The Regional Offices (44 FTE, including 27 professionals), on behalf of the General Counsel,

investigate and resolve alleged ULP charges, file and prosecute ULP complaints at trials 

before an ALJ, effectuate compliance with settlement agreements and Authority Orders, and 

provide training and alternative dispute resolution services. In addition, through delegation 

from the Authority, the Regional Offices investigate and resolve REP petitions and conduct 

secret-ballot elections. Currently, 44 percent of FLRA staff are employed in the Regional 

Offices, where all ULP charges and REP petitions are filed.
12

There are five Regional Offices located in Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; 

San Francisco, California; and Washington, D.C.

Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP)

The Federal Service Impasses Panel is composed of part-time Presidential appointees who are 

appointed to fixed, staggered five-year terms. The FSIP assists in resolving negotiation 

impasses between Federal agencies and labor organizations representing Federal employees 

that arise from collective-bargaining negotiations under the Statute and the Federal 

Employees Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules Act.

AGENCY TRENDS & CHALLENGES

Introduction

The primary challenge facing the Agency is understaffing, especially within the OGC. FLRA 

needs to bring staffing back to a level at which it can accomplish its mission.

Base 

Adjustment.................................................................................................$2,051,000

Pay Inflation + $2 million

Funds are requested to account for a 5.2 percent pay raise effective January 2024. This 

percentage was based on the inflation factor that was provided by the Office of Management 

and Budget. Base adjustment also covers inflationary cost for rent, communications, 

utilities, etc.
13

Program Increases........................................................................................$2,286,000

Increase Staff in the Office of General Counsel + $1.7 million

Funds are requested to hire 8 FTEs for the OGC.

Increase Staff in the Collaboration & Alternative Dispute Resolution Office + $0.2 million

Funds are requested to hire 1 FTE for CADRO.

IT initiatives + $0.3 million

Funds are requested to fund cybersecurity enhancements, an IT refresh, and advancement 

of the OMB required records digitization effort. 

Anticipated Travel Increases + $0.1 million

Funds are requested to fund an anticipated increase in travel.

FLRA’s recent history, is one of doing much more with much less. Consider our recent 

challenges:

• Significant budget cuts and flat budgets – from 

$29,611,000 in 2004, currently at $29,400,000

• Significant FTE cuts – from 213 in 2004 to 116 

in FY23

• Long Vacancies in key positions:

o Chairman and Authority Members

o General Counsel and Deputy General 

Counsel, including no General Counsel 

from November 2017 to March 2021 

(nearly four years)

o Panel Members

o Solicitor

o Executive Director

o Human Resources Director

o Five of the Regional Directors (of the then-seven Regional Offices)

• FEVS ranking as one of the worst small agencies to work for in 2018 (27 of 29) and 

2019 (27 of 28)

• OMB Corrective Action Plan in April 2009

Over the last seven years, excessively tight budgets necessitated that we squeeze every spare 

penny we could, using whatever means available, such as not purchasing needed equipment 

and delaying filling positions (hiring lags). While FLRA has no “fat” in our small agency 

budget, we are well past fat-cutting and have even moved to amputation (the closure of two 

Regional Offices in 2018 and 2019) to attempt to fund FTE and other needs. While increasing 

costs are not unique to FLRA, being a very small agency, we have less financial latitude to 

absorb cost inflation than other agencies. At this point, FLRA has exhausted its ability to 

absorb inflation through staff attrition and operational efficiencies.

Even when FLRA did see some meager budget increases, they were not enough to keep up 

with inflation over the last 20 years, let alone fund FLRA, in FY24, at a level at which the 

ability to discharge our statutory responsibilities is not severely compromised. If FLRA does 
14

not see an actual program-line increase in its budget for FY24 to hire additional staff, we may 

well have to reduce the small staff we currently have.3

Through the prudent management of resources, as well as the incredible, exhaustive efforts of 

the very limited number of professionals we currently have, FLRA has been able to meet, in 

most areas, its minimum performance level under the Statute. FLRA is a smartly-managed 

organization that makes the most of its passionate staff to complete FLRA’s mission and all 

that entails. But the intense enthusiasm and excitement our employees have for FLRA’s

mission can only go so far when OGC is dealing with significantly increased numbers of ULP

and REP case filings, as well as a massive increase in its litigation responsibilities. Indeed, 

while the employees break their backs to complete the mission at all costs, the caseloads 

continue to grow, quality suffers, and cases become more and more untimely. This means we 

will fail in our mission when agencies, labor organizations, and employees seek our expertise 

in resolving their labor-management disputes.

While the small staff of Regional Office professionals, to their immense credit, increased their 

productivity in FY21 and FY22 by 30% and 13%, respectively, the staff can no longer keep up 

with the increasing workload. The number of ULP filings increased 51% over the same period 

and the number of REP filings increased by 49%. Additional professionals to handle the cases 

is critical.

FLRA is at a watershed moment. FLRA’s FY22 and 23 Budget Requests would have funded

135 FTEs. Because the enacted budgets were under the requested levels, the FLRA could not 

afford an increase in FTEs, and could only afford to reach 116 FTEs because of hiring lags. 

Even as OGC, OALJ, and CADRO, caseloads exploded, no new FTEs were funded to meet the 

new reality.

To effectively accomplish its important mission of resolving and helping prevent workplace 

disputes, FLRA itself needs a first-in-class workforce. Understaffing FLRA, especially on the 

heels of the significant and painful downsizing that had already taken place within the OGC, 

undermines FLRA’s ability to complete its mission and recruit, professionally develop, and 

retain top performers.

As a small agency primarily employing highly-educated attorneys, personnel compensation

and benefits account for the largest share of FLRA’s overall budget: nearly 80 percent in FY23. 

The requested FTE funding increase for FY24 is to bring back the professional labor that is 

essential to carrying out the Agency’s mission of investigations, settlement, litigation, 

adjudication, and improvement of workplace relationships, so sorely needed by our parties. 

FLRA is its people; without the appropriate cadre of professionals, FLRA cannot function and 

its mission, critical to the government as a whole, is left undone.

Certainly, the highest priority must be FTEs, but the lack of funding has also stymied FLRA’s

efforts to finance much needed IT investments to replace antiquated programs and hardware

and bring FLRA’s cyber security footing up to date. To address all of these challenges, protect

 

3 Reducing through attrition is a best-case scenario. Even reducing through attrition will cripple the 

agency and make it, practically, impossible to carry out the FLRA mission while also ensuring quality 

and timeliness.
15

the Statutory right to engage in collective bargaining, and provide a more constructive 

approach to labor-management relations in the Federal sector, urgent action must be taken.

Office of the General Counsel

The OGC plays a fundamental role in facilitating orderly, efficient, and effective change within 

the Federal Government. Inadequate staffing interferes with the OGC’s ability to promptly 

investigate and resolve ULP charges and REP petitions. Given the high rate of unionization in 

the Federal Government, workplace change frequently requires collective bargaining or a 

representation proceeding, or both. Indeed, the vast majority of ULP and REP cases are filed 

in response to a management-initiated change in conditions of employment. One only need 

look at the effect of the pandemic on government-wide operations to imagine the complex 

nature of negotiations between agencies and the labor organizations that represent their 

employees. The OGC has highly sought-after Statutory expertise on these matters that 

agencies and labor organizations often lack.

The pace at which the OGC resolves these ULP and REP cases directly affects the pace of 

government change. The Statute generally requires management to maintain the status quo

during negotiations and during the pendency of a representation proceeding. The core purpose 

of the Statute is to promote collective bargaining as a means of fostering improved employee 

performance, quality of work life, and government operations. Hence, the quality and 

timeliness of OGC case investigations and dispositions, and the extent to which OGC agents 

are able to take full advantage of dispute resolution opportunities, directly impact the 

effectiveness and efficiency of government change. The OGC cannot reasonably be expected to 

fully complete its mission at the increased levels of case filings without a commensurate 

increase in FTEs.

The OGC saw a 50% increase in ULP charges filed in FYs 2021 and 2022, and conservatively 

projects a 20% increase in charges filed in FYs 2023 and 2024. This will bring the number of 

ULP charges filed to what they were prior to 2017, when case filings began to fall precipitously 

in the absence of a GC. Similarly, REP petitions filed have also risen, by 33% just in FY22. The 

OGC conservatively estimates a 20% increase in petitions filed in FYs 2023 and 2024, bringing 

the number of REP petitions filed to what they were prior to 2017. Concomitant with this 

increase in filings, the professional staff saw their caseloads4 drastically increase.

In 2018, the OGC employed 42 professionals: in 2023, 27. A normal ULP/REP investigatory 

caseload for OGC professionals is between 25-30 ULP and REP cases per month. In February 

2021, ULP charge and REP petition filings began to significantly increase. At that time, had 

the OGC still had 42 professionals in the Regions, the caseloads would have been at 31

ULP/REP cases per professional/month by the end of FY22: high, but manageable.

 

4 A “caseload” is the number of ULP and REP cases a professional is assigned to investigate and bring to 

a final action. Investigations often take months of work, gathering evidence and obtaining testimony 

from witnesses, before a final action can be taken by the Regional Director, on behalf of the General 

Counsel. As investigations are occurring and final actions are taken on some cases, more cases are 

assigned to the professional on a daily basis. 
16

However, the OGC had only 26 professionals in February 2021, and never rose above 27

professionals in any month thereafter. As a result, the agents had caseloads that rose to 49 

cases per professional/month by the end of FY22. Currently, the professionals are carrying 

almost double the normal caseload, while also litigating the highest inherited inventory of 

complaint cases in the history of the OGC, as well as newly authorized complaints. And the 

filing of REP petitions is expected to grow even greater due to OPM’s issuance of “Guidance on 

Implementation of EO 14025: Addressing Whether Non-Bargaining Unit Positions are 

Correctly Excluded from Bargaining Unit Coverage.” Only FLRA may determine bargaining 

units, including which positions are included in, or excluded from, those units. OGC Regional 

Offices, on delegation from the Authority, process these petitions. 

We are not merely asking our professionals to work a bit harder for a limited amount of time 

until we are over a rough spot. We are asking them to do an overwhelming workload, do it well 

and in a timely manner, for the foreseeable future, with no relief in sight. Since this cannot be 

sustained, the OGC will likely not meet its goals for FY23 or FY24.

During the 31⁄2 years without a General Counsel, an unprecedented inherited inventory of 494

complaints developed. Historically, the OGC settles or litigates, on average, about six 

complaints per attorney per year (about 250 in total per year, with 42 attorneys5). Since an 

Acting GC was named in March 2021, the OGC resolved 242, issued complaint in 223, and 

expects to resolve or litigate the remaining 29 inherited complaints in FY 2023. The Acting GC 

made working on the complaints which had been pending since 2017 a priority for the OGC 

professionals and they more than rose to the challenge laid down for them – completing the 

herculean task in just under two years (247 per year, with 27 employees). The professionals 

did this even while, for the first time in OGC history, learning to litigate through virtual trials.

While working on the inherited inventory of 494 complaints, however, the professionals 

continued to investigate the newly-filed6 ULP charges assigned to them and the number of 

complaints on those charges grew, creating a backlog of newly authorized complaint cases, 

which is currently at 301 cases. OGC staff have worked to resolve or issue complaint on these 

new complaint recommendations, but it continues to grow by about 25 complaints each month. 

As with the inherited inventory of 494 complaint cases, there are simply not enough attorneys 

to resolve or litigate the complaints on the newly-filed charges. And prioritizing the complaints 

over other work will necessarily result in a backlog of investigations of newly filed ULP and 

REP cases. The result will be a significant increase in the number of untimely ULP and REP 

decisions.

To have any chance of getting to a place where there are neither complaint nor investigation 

backlogs and the OGC is meeting its performance goals for quality and timeliness, the OGC 

must rebuild to 35 attorneys in the Regions, which is still under the number on board in March 

2018.

 

5 Forty-two was the number of attorneys in the OGC when the last complaint, issued under 

the prior GC and then Acting GC, was litigated in March 2018.

6 The newly authorized complaint backlog is on ULP charges which were filed after the March 23, 2021, 

designation of an Acting General Counsel.
17

Ultimately, an “all-hands-on-deck”-like effort is simply not sustainable in the long term and 

cannot be expected of the staff year after year. Continuing to expect 27 OGC professionals to 

do the work of 42, has led some to seek employment elsewhere and will likely lead others to do 

the same. This represents a waste of dedicated OGC time and resources, over several years, 

intensively training each new professional to understand the nature of the Federal 

government, FLRA, and Statute, and how to investigate and litigate the ULP charges and REP 

petitions filed with the OGC.

Authority

As discussed above, the Authority comprises the three FLRA Members, each of whom has a 

staff. Unlike some other quasi-judicial agencies that have centralized staffs to process cases 

(such as the Merit Systems Protection Board), the Authority – similar to still other quasijudicial agencies (such as the National Labor Relations Board) – processes cases out of the 

Member-staff offices. Thus, while the Member offices are currently fully staffed, it is 

imperative to continue to fully fund them so that the Authority can continue to process cases.

In addition to the Member staffs, there are several other offices and programs under the 

Authority’s jurisdiction, including the Office of the Executive Director, Office of the Solicitor, 

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

Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO), and the Equal Employment 

Opportunity Program (EEO).

Beginning in FY17, the Authority began to see increases in the number of arbitration appeals 

filed, with significant increases occurring in FYs 2019 and 2020. Additionally, in FY20, the 

Authority saw a near-doubling of the number of petitions filed in negotiability cases – often the 

most complex, time-consuming cases that the Authority resolves. At the same time, there was 

significant turnover in Authority staff, including the loss of some of the most experienced 

Authority staff. Further, CADRO – which assists parties in voluntarily resolving their 

arbitration and negotiability cases – was eliminated, thereby requiring the Authority to devote 

significant time and resources to issuing formal decisions in those cases. Largely due to these 

factors, the numbers of pending cases, and the age of those cases at disposition, began to 

increase, while the FLRA’s parties awaited resolution of their disputes.

Since February of 2021, the Authority has successfully focused most of its efforts on reducing 

these caseloads. In FY21, the Authority closed more cases than it closed in any of the prior five 

years, and substantially more than it had closed in FY18, FY19, and FY20. In FY22, the 

Authority continued that trend, ending the year with 100 pending cases – fewer than half of 

the 217 cases pending at the end of FY20. The Authority’s ability to significantly reduce its 

pending caseload has been due, in large part, to the restoration of CADRO – discussed further 

below. 

At the same time, the Authority is continuing to receive a higher-than-average number of 

negotiability appeals. Additionally, as the OGC and the OALJ continue to litigate and decide 

the unprecedented inherited inventory of ULP complaints, as well as the newly authorized 

complaint cases, the Authority anticipates an increase in the number of ULP exceptions filed. 

Further, as the OGC anticipates resolving an increased number of REP cases, the Authority 

expects to see an increase in the number of REP appeals filed. 
18

Moreover, while the Authority has continued to issue decisions at a relatively steady pace, 

since early January 2023, the Authority has lacked a full complement of Members. Although 

the Members continue to agree on most cases and issue decisions accordingly, they do not 

agree on every case. Therefore, the absence of a third Member to “break the tie” threatens to 

result in the development of a new case backlog if not rectified expeditiously.

Unfortunately, as the Authority has focused its efforts on reducing its caseloads, it has kept 

the Authority from being able to carry out other important initiatives. The Authority has been 

unable to devote time or resources to implementing much-needed, long-overdue updates to its

regulations, including its negotiability regulations and its procedural regulations. For 

example, the Authority’s regulations currently limit what the parties may file, and what the 

Authority may formally serve to parties, electronically. Revisions are vitally needed to keep up 

with the realities of the 21st Century workplace.

Additionally, the Authority’s caseload-reduction focus has severely curtailed the Authority’s 

ability to provide training to FLRA parties, at a time when party requests for arbitration and 

negotiability training – including in-person training – are surging. Further, the Authority has 

been unable to devote staff time to developing and updating its training materials and 

guidance documents. For example, the Guide to Arbitration, which summarizes the Authority’s 

precedent and practices in the type of case that makes up most of the Authority’s caseload, has 

not been updated since 2016, and the Guide to Negotiability has not been updated since its 

initial creation nearly a decade ago. The lack of training and current educational materials has

resulted in there being fewer useful – and much-needed – educational tools available to 

FLRA’s parties. Less-informed parties often are more prone to engage in unnecessary, timely, 

and costly litigation – thereby further adding to the Authority’s decisional caseload.

Despite these needs and challenges, FLRA anticipates that, with current staffing levels, the 

Authority will be able to undertake some of these vital initiatives while maintaining

reasonable caseloads, avoiding the development of new case backlogs, and issuing more timely 

decisions. Therefore, FLRA is not requesting funding for additional FTEs in the Member 

offices, CIP, the Office of the Solicitor, or the EEO program. However, the Authority’s ability to

successfully carry out these functions and meet the parties’ needs will depend on, among other 

things, funding a third position in CADRO. As discussed further below, that will help parties 

voluntarily resolve their disputes in ULP, negotiability, and arbitration cases, without 

requiring the Member offices and CIP to devote their time and resources to issuing formal, 

written decisions, as well as providing the other critically important services discussed above.

Further, as requests for in-person training continue to surge, FLRA needs its travel budget to 

be fully funded, because FLRA is limited in its ability to seek travel reimbursement from many 

of its parties.

Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ)

Significant progress has been made by the OALJ toward resolving the unprecedented backlog 

of complaints triggered by the lack of a General Counsel for 31⁄2 years. In July 2022, the OALJ 

filled a vacancy for a third Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), which will also contribute to 

improving its efficiency in eliminating the complaint backlog. ALJs conduct hearings and issue 

recommended decisions in cases involving alleged ULPs. ALJs also author decisions in cases 

without conducting hearings based upon preliminary matters. Because ALJs’ recommended 

decisions can be appealed to the Authority, the Authority undoubtedly will continue to 

experience an increase in its ULP caseload, as discussed above. When parties are unable to 
19

settle their cases, the unique skill set of judges ensures that full, adversarial due process 

hearings are conducted in order to resolve the dispute. While judges can conduct legal research 

and writing tasks, FLRA has prioritized their limited time to conducting trials and drafting 

decisions in order to bring justice to litigants who have been waiting years for their dispute to 

be heard and resolved.

In addition to conducting hearings and issuing recommended decisions on cases involving 

alleged ULPs, ALJs render recommended decisions involving applications for attorney fees 

filed under the Back Pay Act and the Equal Access to Justice Act. Since an Acting General 

Counsel was appointed by President Biden, OALJ has been scheduling four to six ULP cases 

per ALJ for hearing every other week in order to aggressively reduce the backlog.

The OGC filed 131 ULP complaints with the OALJ in FY22, and estimates increasing to 300 

cases in FY23 and 175 in FY24. The OALJ caseload is directly proportional to the number of 

complaints filed by the General Counsel. It has taken nearly two years to reduce only the 

inherited inventory of 494 complaint cases to 29, which will be resolved over FY23. This 

number does not include the number of complaints which the OGC will issue on newly filed 

ULPs that will be filed each year in addition to the backlog. The remaining cases that do not 

settle before trial are the most complex and litigious. With three judges, the OALJ can expect 

to issue 45 decisions in FY23 and FY24.

Further, more litigation is expected to be begin being conducted again in person. That will 

require FLRA to pay ALJs’ travel expenses. Thus, fully funding FLRA’s travel budget will be 

vital to allowing FLRA to enforce the Statute.

Collaboration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (CADRO)

FLRA’s highly successful and vitally important CADRO has been key to FLRA mission 

performance for most of the past 27 years. CADRO conflict-management experts serve the 

dual role of efficiently resolving complex, sensitive cases pending before FLRA and delivering 

training, facilitation, and labor-management-relationship services, in order to restore 

constructive labor-management relationships between federal agencies and unions. Like ADR 

generally, CADRO has earned significant bipartisan support.

In FY24 and beyond, CADRO will continue to play a crucial role in accomplishing FLRA’s 

performance goal to resolve cases and reduce litigation and its attendant costs. CADRO offers 

FLRA parties voluntary, confidential mediation to achieve timely resolution of negotiability 

disputes and arbitration exceptions pending before the Authority, as well as settlement 

conferences in ULP complaint cases. CADRO dispute-resolution services prevent unnecessary 

and costly litigation before FLRA and make case processing more effective and efficient. 

CADRO will continue to be essential to preventing and reducing case backlogs for the 

Authority and FLRA’s ALJs. The OALJ’s ULP complaint caseload continues to skew the 

application of CADRO resources heavily in that direction. In FY24, the OALJ will expect 

CADRO staff to conduct about 180 settlement conferences in ULP complaint cases so as to 

prevent ULP complaints from becoming unnecessarily backed up waiting for trial. In addition, 

the Authority will expect CADRO staff to resolve about a dozen sensitive arbitration exception 

(appeal) cases and at least 200 complex legal issues in at least 30 negotiability cases, so that 

Members and their attorneys can adjudicate other matters on the Authority’s docket and 

perform other critical functions discussed above.
20

CADRO also is an important vehicle through which FLRA exercises leadership in the manner 

specifically adopted by the President in a report from the Vice President and the Secretary of 

Labor entitled White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment (publicly 

released February 07, 2022) and envisioned by the President in his April 26, 2021 Executive 

Order on Worker Organizing and Empowerment (14025) and his January 22, 2021 Executive 

Order Protecting the Federal Workforce (14003). In FY24, CADRO plans to expertly deliver at 

least a dozen facilitations, training programs, and important initiatives to repair fractured

workplace relationships. These services will be offered to federal agencies and unions that 

want to more constructively manage workplace conflict and prevent conflict from erupting into 

destructive disputes. CADRO helps these stakeholders resolve difficult, pragmatic issues that 

otherwise are likely to impair mission performance, degrade quality of work life, and foment 

new cases before FLRA. These CADRO services not only minimize the need for third-party 

intervention, they enable agencies and unions to fundamentally transform their workplace 

relationships. The long-term result is better mission performance and better quality of work 

life throughout Government: real evidence that these initiatives benefit agencies, employees, 

unions, and the American public. The value of CADRO dispute-prevention and disputeresolution services goes far beyond the staff hours and the taxpayer dollars that it saves by 

preventing and settling disputes.

One specific way in which CADRO assists with implementing the White House Task Force’s 

recommendations is by helping federal agencies and unions reinstitute their labormanagement forums (LMFs). LMFs are a method through which federal agencies and unions 

work collaboratively on a wide range of issues, at the front end of the decision-making process,

in order to deliver the highest quality services to the American public, Although LMFs are not 

currently mandated, FLRA expects that the Office of Personnel Management will mandate 

them in the near future. As a result, the need for CADRO’s assistance in this area is expected 

to continue to grow, perhaps significantly.

CADRO presently has only two FTEs and no dedicated administrative support. Such a tiny 

staff is limited in its ability to assist parties with such matters as well as their disputes. As 

reflected in the table below, CADRO expects to close more than 200 intervention cases and 

another dozen prevention cases in FY24. That is an unsustainable number for two FTEs. They 

cannot possibly keep pace with projected requests to resolve ULP complaints pending before

FLRA ALJs, in addition to arbitration exceptions and complex negotiability cases containing 

hundreds of legal disputes pending before the Authority Members. Nor can two FTEs fully 

satisfy joint agency and union requests for training, facilitation, and assistance repairing and 

improving essential labor-management relationships. Moreover, as discussed above, expected 

Authority caseloads and other priorities for Authority staff make it unlikely that non-CADRO 

staff at FLRA can continue providing CADRO staff with the same level of essential assistance 

in CADRO cases – particularly given that FLRA is not requesting funding for additional FTEs 

on the Authority Members’ and CIP staffs in FY24. For these reasons, FLRA has made it a 

priority to restore the third FTE to CADRO during FY24 (that was eliminated in 2017). The 

third CADRO FTE is critical to continue delivering expert ADR services to help parties resolve 

important cases, deliver facilitation and necessary training, and lead essential workplacerelationship repair, all of which are key to FLRA accomplishing its mission and to promote 

stable, constructive labor relations.

As a direct result of restoring the third FTE, additional disputes in cases pending before the 

Authority and FLRA ALJs will be significantly reduced, narrowed, and resolved in a timelier 

manner. Members of the labor-management community will become better equipped to 
21

prevent and constructively manage workplace conflict and resolve their own disputes without 

third-party intervention and resources. Fewer cases will require FLRA adjudication, thereby 

preserving limited FLRA case-processing resources and associated resources of the agencies 

and unions that FLRA serves. The high impact of restoring a third CADRO FTE in FY24

makes it a critical priority to fund this request.

Case Type FY 2024 est.

Negotiability Petitions 30

Arbitration Exceptions 12

Other 10

Repair, Train and Facilitate 12

Subtotal 64

Unfair Labor Practice Cases 180

Total 244

Office of the Executive Director

FLRA continues to seek to fund critical projects, primarily within the IT and Cybersecurity 

realm. A major challenge within the Office of the Executive Director is related to the 

restoration of Agency FTEs. When there are funding needs, the primary focus for savings falls 

on the small administrative budget – resulting in inadequate support and loss of needed tools. 

The goal of building a more agile organization to quickly respond and align to changing 

mission needs, innovations, and technological advancements, is in serious jeopardy, should the 

Agency not receive the requested budget in FY24. Administratively, FLRA has continually 

done more with less, just as it has done on the mission side of the Agency. However, the 

situation is becoming urgent. Critical IT infrastructure and hardware are becoming past their 

end of life (EOL) schedule. The Agency has been forced to make decisions relative to budget 

concerns vs. properly managing its IT program.

IT Investment, Cybersecurity, and Modernization

In FY24, the FLRA is seeking funds to continue much needed IT investments. Besides the 

Agency’s continued request for funding to support reestablishing FTE levels to meet the 

mission, the Agency continues to request funding to support its Information Technology 

Modernization efforts. With the FY22 and FY23 requests, the Agency was underfunded and 

could not afford to pay for needed investments. A significant investment needs to be made, to 

meet the mandated Cybersecurity Executive Orders and the general day-to-day IT operations. 

A prolonged absence of funding for critical administrative infrastructure, such as 

Cybersecurity, IT equipment, and technology modernization, has had a grave effect on the 

continued success of FLRA. While the Agency has been somewhat successful in shuffling 

mission priorities and keeping mission critical functions moving, each time this is done, we are 

brought farther and farther from safe, efficient, and effective, labor relations in the Federal 

Government.

A major multi-year investment is the Agency continuing – however slowly – its march towards 

electronic case files. This too has become a victim of inadequate funding. The Agency is now in

its 7th year of updating its Case Management System (CMS), which was scheduled for 4 years. 
22

The delay is due, solely, to funding, because the Agency hasn’t had the discretionary funds to 

adequately keep the project moving. There have been some successes – releasing the updated 

eFile and the Authority component – but we still have two other components to complete (over 

half of the Agency). Fully funding the Agency at its request will finally allow the Agency to 

address these initiatives. 

Agency policy, as well as best practice, requires a refresh of computing resources – laptops, 

servers, etc. – no less frequent than every five years. Agency refresh activities are critical, both 

in the Agency’s ability to properly address cybersecurity concerns, but also to avoid fiscally 

irresponsible operations. Old hardware requires constant resources, from a staff resource and 

monetary standpoint. For example, during the pandemic, the Agency audio/visual and phone 

equipment has all reached end of life/end of support, resulting in an inability to adequately 

patch with security updates. However, as previously mentioned, the Agency did not receive its 

FY22 and FY23 requested amounts and could not afford to fully act on its Agency technology 

priorities. With each year, this becomes increasingly more dangerous. It is critical that the 

Agency FY24 request be fully funded to support the agency needs. If not, it will further delay 

our ability to address these critical essential functions - and, quite possibly, become 

catastrophic where we are unable to complete even basic daily mission-critical functions. 

CURRENT SERVICES ESTIMATE

FLRA will require $33,737,000 in 2024 to successfully meet its statutory and regulatory 

responsibilities.

(In thousands of dollars)
23

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

Appropriations Language

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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

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

1978, including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and including hire of experts and 

consultants, hire of passenger motor vehicles, and including official reception and 

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

Columbia and elsewhere, [$29,400,000] $33,737,000: 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, 2023.)

2024 Funding Request

The 2024 budget for the U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority in the amount of $33,737,000 

is necessary to meet statutory and regulatory responsibilities. The Agency’s 2024 request will 

fund 125 FTEs.

(In thousands of dollars)
24

Program and Financing Schedule

(In thousands of dollars)
25

Object Classification Schedule

(In thousands of dollars)

Employment Summary Schedule
26

Inspector General Resources

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

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 FLRA’s resources and operations, a 

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

maximizing the efficiency and integrity of Agency programs.

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

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

Agency. The IG communicates the results of investigations and assessments to FLRA 

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

IG communicates results in formal reports that contain findings and recommendations aimed 

at correcting any deficiencies identified and promoting efficiency and effectiveness in Agency 

programs and operations. The IG also manages a hotline to provide employees and the public 

with a direct means for confidentially communicating information on potential fraud, waste, or 

abuse.

FLRA’s 2024 funding request includes $1,059,609 for the OIG. 

The OIG’s FYs 2021, 2022, and 2023 submissions include an Attorney to provide mandated 

legal services to the IG in accordance with the IG Act, as amended. Since 2010, the FLRA OIG 

has had a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Department of Treasury OIG to 

provide statutory mandated legal services to the FLRA OIG. The MOU has saved the FLRA 

OIG over $2 million. In June 2019, the Treasury IG retired, and FLRA has no assurance the 

new IG will continue to provide these mandated legal services.

The IG’s Budget Request for FY23 was $929,888 and in FY24 the OIG is requesting 

$1,059,609. This results in a $129,721 net increase over the OIG’s 2023 budget request. The 

OIG hired a GS-15 Senior Auditor in FY22 to replace the GS-14 auditor resulting in the 

increase from the prior year request.

Thus, as requested in FYs 2021, 2022 and 2023, this level includes funding for 3 FTEs to 

provide mandated legal services to the IG in accordance with the IG Act. The funding level 

requested by the IG, includes $10,000 for training and $4,222 to support the Council of the 

Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency has been requested in total. The IG has 

certified that FLRA’s funding request for the OIG satisfies all training requirements for 2024.
27

August 4, 2022

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:

entity to which the IG reports specifying:

a. The aggregate amount of funds requested for the operations of the OIG,

b. 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

c. 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 2024:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20424-0001

INSPECTOR GENERAL
28

• The aggregate budget request for the operations of the OIG is $1,059,609;

• The portion of this amount needed for OIG training is $10,000; and

• The portion of this amount needed to support the CIGIE is $4,222. 

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 2024.

Inspector General

Federal Labor Relations Authority
29

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN

The FLRA organizes its Strategic Plan by three Strategic Goals. Each Strategic Goal has a 

number of Strategic Objectives. Each Strategic Objective has a number of Performance Goals 

with unique and trackable measures, which are used to determine the Agency’s progress. This 

section outlines the Agency’s performance goals and results across a 5-year period.

FLRA Strategic Goals

Strategic Goal #1 Strategic Goal #2 Strategic Goal #3

We will resolve disputes 

under the Federal Service 

Labor-Management Relations 

Statute in a timely, highquality, and impartial 

manner.

We will promote stability in the 

federal labor-management 

community by providing 

leadership and guidance 

through Alternative Dispute 

Resolution and education.

We will manage our resources 

effectively and efficiently in 

order to achieve organizational 

excellence.

Strategic Objectives

1.1. Achieve or exceed caseresolution timeliness 

measures, as established by 

each component.

2.1. Offer high-quality outreach 

and prevention services, as 

well as reference resources, 

to promote more effective 

labor-management relations 

across the federal 

government.

3.1. Recruit, retain, and 

develop a highly talented, 

motivated, and diverse 

workforce to accomplish the 

FLRA’s mission.

1.2. Set a high standard of 

quality for the caseresolution process.

2.2. Maximize the use of 

Alternative Dispute 

Resolution practices in case 

resolution.

3.2. Improve usage of existing 

technology and deploy new 

IT systems to streamline and 

enhance organizational 

operations.

3.3. Act as an effective steward 

of agency resources.

FY 2022 PERFORMANCE GOALS

Performance Goal 1.1.1: Timely investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate each case type 

(ULP, REP, ARB, NEG, IMPASSE)

Performance Goal 1.1.2: Resolve overage cases in a timely fashion

Performance Goal 1.2.1: Develop a mechanism for soliciting external feedback on the 

FLRA case-resolution process

Performance Goal 1.2.2: Score highly on internal quality reviews regarding the caseresolution process
30

Performance Goal 2.1.1: Provide targeted training, outreach and prevention, and 

facilitation activities within the labor-management community.

Performance Goal 2.1.2: Provide effective, useful, up-to-date case-processing and case-law 

resources and trainings for the labor-management community.

Performance Goal 2.2.1: Successful resolution of a significant portion of FLRA cases 

through ADR.

Performance Goal 2.2.2: Expanded use of ADR in ARB cases.

Performance Goal 2.2.3: Examination of potential expanded use of ADR in REP cases.

Performance Goal 3.1.1: Demonstrate strong recruitment and retention practices.

Performance Goal 3.1.2: Maintain and grow agency expertise through employee 

development.

Performance Goal 3.1.3: Develop internal tools and benchmarks for skills assessment, 

training-needs assessment, and effective succession planning.

Performance Goal 3.2.1: Improve eFiling capability and maximize its use in receiving case 

filings.

Performance Goal 3.2.2: Enhance employee technology usage and skills at every level.

Performance Goal 3.3.1: Achieve high internal customer-service scores on delivery of 

administrative services.

Performance Goal 3.3.2: Meet or exceed established operational measures.

Performance Goal 3.3.3: Be a leader in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey and in 

the “Best Places to Work in the Federal Government” rankings.

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: WE WILL RESOLVE DISPUTES UNDER THE FEDERAL 

SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE IN A TIMELY, HIGHQUALITY, AND IMPARTIAL MANNER

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.1.1: TIMELY INVESTIGATE, PROSECUTE, AND 

ADJUDICATE EACH CASE TYPE (ULP, REP, ARB, NEG, IMPASSE).

PERFORMANCE GOAL 1.1.2: RESOLVE OVERAGE CASES IN A TIMELY FASHION.

Representation cases

The Statute sets out a specific procedure for employees to petition to be represented by a labor 

union and to determine which employees will be included in a “bargaining unit” that a union 

represents. Implementing this procedure, the FLRA conducts secret-ballot elections for union 

representation and resolves a variety of issues related to questions of union representation of 

employees. These issues include, for example, whether particular employees are managers or 

“confidential” employees excluded from union representation, whether there has been election 

misconduct on the part of agencies or unions, and whether changes in union and agency 

organizations affect existing bargaining units. Representation cases are initiated when an 

individual, a labor organization, or an agency files a petition with a Regional Office. After a 

petition is filed, the Regional Director conducts an investigation, which may include holding a 

hearing to determine the appropriateness of a unit or other matter related to the petition. 

After concluding such investigation, the Regional Director may conduct a secret-ballot election 
31

or issue a Decision and Order, which is final unless an application for review (appeal) is filed 

with the Authority.

Unfair Labor Practice cases

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

prosecution, of ULP charges. ULP cases originate with the filing of an unfair labor practice 

charge in a Regional Office by an employee, a labor organization, or an agency. Once a charge 

has been filed, the Regional Office will investigate the charge to determine whether it has 

merit. If the Regional Director determines that the charge has merit, then the Regional 

Director will, absent settlement, issue and prosecute a complaint before an ALJ. If the 

Regional Director determines that the charge lacks merit, then the charging party is entitled 

to a written explanation, and, if not satisfied, may appeal that decision to the General Counsel 

in Washington, D.C. If the General Counsel upholds the dismissal, then the case is closed. The 

Authority has appointed ALJs to hear ULP cases prosecuted by the General Counsel. The 

OALJ transmits recommended decisions of the ALJs to the Authority, which may affirm, 

modify, or reverse the ALJs in whole or in part on exceptions (appeal). Authority decisions set 

legal precedent on the meaning, operation, and enforcement of the Statute. If no exceptions are 

filed to an ALJ’s decision, then the Authority adopts the decision without precedential 

significance.

Arbitration cases

Either party to grievance arbitration may file with the Authority an “exception” to (an appeal 

of) an arbitrator’s award. The Authority will review an arbitrator’s award to which an 

exception has been filed to determine whether the award is deficient because it is contrary to 

any law, rule, or regulation, or on grounds similar to those applied by federal courts in privatesector, labor management relations.

Negotiability cases

A federal agency bargaining with a union may claim that a particular union proposal cannot 

be bargained because it conflicts with federal law, a government-wide rule or regulation, or an 

agency regulation for which there is a compelling need. In addition, agency heads may 

disapprove collective-bargaining agreements if those agreements are contrary to law. In both 

of these situations, a union may petition the Authority to resolve the negotiability dispute.

Bargaining-Impasse cases

In carrying out the right to bargain collectively, on occasion union representatives and federal 

agencies fail to reach agreement on issues; the bargaining reaches 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 third-party mediation such as the FMCS; or seek the assistance of the FSIP in 

resolving the negotiation impasse, but only after the assistance of third-party mediation has 

failed.
32

Authority

Arbitration Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 122 146 121 76 61

Exceptions filed (Intake) 131 118 81 108 108

Total caseload 253 264 202 184 169

Cases closed procedurally 17 23 22 28 28

Cases closed based on merits 90 120 104 95 95

Total cases closed (Output) 107 143 126 123 123

Cases pending, end of year 146 121 76 61 46
33

Measure 1.1.1a (Previously 1.1.1): The average age of arbitration exceptions 

decided by the Authority. 

Results Targets

2020 317 days

Not Met 2020 248 days

2021 395 days

Not Met 2021 248 days

2022 405 days

Not Met 2022 375 days

2023 385 days

2024 366 days

Measure 1.1.1b (New): The average age of arbitration cases pending before the 

Authority.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 268 days

2024 255 days

Measure 1.1.1c (Previously 1.1.2): The percentage of arbitration cases 

decided by the Authority within 210 days of the filing of exceptions.

Results Targets

2020 32% – (34/107 cases)

Not Met 2020 75%

2021 29% - (42/143 cases)

Not Met 2021 75%

2022 23% - (32/126 cases)

Not Met 2022 75%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Measure 1.1.1d (New): The percentage of arbitration cases decided by the 

Authority within 210 days of assignment to a Member office.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 50%

2024 50%
34

Authority

Negotiability Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 17 65 34 20 9

Petitions filed (Intake) 80 48 53 61 61

Total caseload 97 113 87 81 70

Cases closed procedurally 19 43 57 64 62

Cases closed based on merits 13 36 10 8 6

Total cases closed (Output) 32 79 67 72 68

Cases pending, end of year 65 34 20 9 2
35

Measure 1.1.1e (Previously 1.1.3): The average age of negotiability cases 

decided by the Authority.

Results Targets

2020 176 days

Not Met 2020 161 days

2021 235 days

Not Met 2021 161 days

2022 247 days

Not Met 2022 223 days

2023 235 days

2024 223 days

Measure 1.1.1f (New): The average age of negotiability cases pending before 

the Authority.*

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A *Measured at the end of the fiscal year. 2023 250 days

2024 237 days

Authority

ULP Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 6 3 2 2 2

Cases filed (Intake) 1 4 11 38 38

Total caseload 7 7 13 40 40

Cases closed procedurally 1 1 9 32 32

Cases closed based on merits 3 4 2 6 6

Total cases closed (Output) 4 5 11 38 38

Cases pending, end of year 3 2 2 2 2
36

Measure 1.1.1g (Previously 1.1.5): The average age of ULP exceptions 

decided by the Authority.

Results Targets

2020 422 days

Not Met 2020 226 days

2021 554 days

Not Met 2021 226 days

2022 105 days

Met 2022 526 days

2023 100 days

2024 95 days

Measure 1.1.1h (New): The average age of ULP cases pending before the 

Authority.*

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A *Measured at the end of the fiscal year. 2023 150 days

2024 142 days

Measure 1.1.1i (Previously 1.1.6): The percentage of ULP cases decided by 

the Authority within 300 days of issuance of an OALJ decision.

Results Targets

2020 25% – (1/4 cases)

Not Met 2020 75%

2021 40% – (2/5 cases)

Not Met 2021 75%

2022 100% – (11/11 cases)

Met 2022 75%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A
37

Measure 1.1.1j (New): The percentage of ULP cases decided by the Authority 

within 300 days of assignment to a Member office.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 75%

2024 75%

Authority

Representation Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 2 4 3 2 2

Applications for review (Intake) 17 3 5 11 11

Total caseload 19 7 8 13 13

Cases closed procedurally 1 0 1 1 1

Cases closed based on merits 15 4 5 10 10

Total cases closed (Output) 16 4 6 11 11

Cases pending, end of year 3 3 2 2 2
38

Measure 1.1.1k (Previously 1.1.7): The average age of representation cases 

decided by the Authority.

Results Targets

2020 210 days

Not Met 2020 184 days

2021 225 days

Not Met 2021 184 days

2022 119 days

Met 2022 214 days

2023 113 days

2024 107 days

Measure 1.1.1l (New): The average age of representation cases pending 

before the Authority.*

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A *Measured at the end of the fiscal year. 2023 86 days

2024 82 days

Measure 1.1.1m (Previously 1.1.8): The percentage of representation cases 

in which the Authority issued a decision whether to grant review within 60 

days of the filing of an application for review.

Results Targets

2020 100% – (16/16 cases)

Met 2020 100%

2021 100% – (4/4 cases)

Met 2021 100%

2022 100% – (6/6 cases)

Met 2022 100%

2023 100%

2024 100%
39

Measure 1.1.1n (Previously 1.1.9): The percentage of representation cases 

decided by the Authority within 210 days of the filing of an application for 

review.

Results Targets

2020 88% – (14/16 cases)

Met 2020 75%

2021 75% – (3/4 cases)

Met 2021 75%

2022 83% – (5/6 cases)

Met 2022 75%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Measure 1.1.1o (New): The percentage of representation cases decided by 

the Authority within 210 days of assignment to a Member office.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 75%

2024 75%

OALJ

ULP Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 1 0 103 122 102

Complaints received (Intake) 0 130 141 300 175

Total caseload 1 130 244 422 277

Settlements before hearing 0 0 95 275 180

Cases closed by decision 1 27 27 45 45

Total cases closed (Output) 1 27 122 320 225

Cases pending, end of year 0 103 122 102 52
40

Measure 1.1.1p (Previously 1.1.10): The median age of ULP complaints 

decided by the OALJ. *

Results Targets

2020 N/A 2020 *

2021 69 days

Met 2021 124 days

2022 71 days

Met 2022 124 days

*OALJ performance standards remain to resolve 80 

percent of ULP complaints within 180 days of filing 

and 95 percent within 365 days.

2023 124 days

2024 124 days

Measure 1.1.1q (Previously 1.1.11): 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

2020 N/A 2020 *

2021 100% – (2/2 cases)

Met 2021 80%

2022 100% – (27/27 cases)

Met 2022 80%

*OALJ performance standards remain to resolve 80 

percent of ULP complaints within 180 days of filing 

and 95 percent within 365 days.

2023 80%

2024 80%
41

OGC

ULP Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 783 903 1031 1295 2088

Charges filed (Intake) 1928 2471 2917 3099 3199

Total caseload 2711 3374 3948 4394 5287

Charges withdrawn/settled 1435 1850 2103 1638 2399

Charges dismissed 373 363 416 368 563

Complaints issued* 0 130 134 300 175

Total cases closed (Output) 1808 2343 26531 23062 31373

Cases pending, end of year 903 1031 1295 2088 2150

*The OGC was unable to issue complaints in the absence of a General Counsel from November 17, 2017, until an Acting 

General Counsel was designated on March 23, 2021. 1 Based on OGC FTE 27 average in FY22. 2 Based on OGC FTE 27 average in FY23. 3 Based on OMB-supported OGC FTE 35.
42

Measure 1.1.1r (Previously 1.1.12): The percentage of ULP charges resolved 

by the Office of the General Counsel by complaint, withdrawal, dismissal, or 

settlement within 120 days of filing of the charge.

Results Targets

2020 94% – (1692/1808 cases)

Met 2020 70%

2021 94% – (2208/2343 cases)

Met 2021 70%

2022 85% – (2245/2653 cases)

Met 2022 70%

2023 70%

2024 70%

OGC

ULP Appeals 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Appeals pending, start of year 303 407 396 366 341

Appeals filed (Intake) 107 70 118 75 75

Total caseload 410 477 514 441 416

Appeals closed (Output)* 3 81 148 100 100

Appeals pending, end of year 407 396 366 341 316

*The OGC was unable to issue decisions on appeals in the absence of a General Counsel, except where a 

jurisdictional issue is presented, from November 17, 2017, until an Acting General Counsel was designated on 

March 23, 2021.
43

Measure 1.1.1s (Previously 1.1.13): The percentage of decisions on an appeal 

of a Regional Director’s dismissal of a ULP charge issued by the General Counsel 

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

Results Targets

2020 100% (3/3 cases) 2020 95%

2021 100% (81/81) 2021 95%

2022 100% (148/148) 2022 95%

2023 95%

2024 95%
44

OGC

Representation Cases 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 49 38 48 82 156

Petitions filed (Intake) 164 135 201 200 250

Total caseload 213 173 249 282 406

Petitions withdrawn 81 42 80 54 80

Cases closed based on merits 94 83 87 72 104

Total cases closed (Output) 175 125 1671 1262 1843

Cases pending, end of year 38 48 82 156 222

1 Based on OGC FTE 27 average in FY22. 2 Based on OGC FTE 27 average in FY23. 3 Based on OMB-supported OGC FTE 35.
45

Measure 1.1.1t (Previously 1.1.14): 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

2020 80% (140/175 cases)

Met 2020 70%

2021 77% (96/125 cases)

Met 2021 70%

2022 74% (122/167 cases)

Met 2022 70%

2023 70%

2024 70%

FSIP

Impasses 2020 2021 2022 2023Est.

2024

Est.

Cases pending, start of year 28 22 45 16 16

Impasses filed (Intake) 90 68 92 90 90

Total caseload 118 90 137 106 106

Panel Decision 40 21 15 * *

Panel declined jurisdiction 23 4 29 * *

Settled with Panel assistance 5 2 38 * *

Voluntarily withdrawn 28 18 39 * *

Cases closed total (Output) 96 45 121 90* 90*

Cases pending, end of year 22 45 16 16* 16*

*The FSIP anticipates closing as many or more cases as are filed in any given year. The means by which cases 

are closed is driven by the parties and directive of the Panel. 
46

Measure 1.1.1x (New): CIP will assign the case to a Member office within 5

days of the due date for a final filing (regardless of whether such a filing has 

been received).

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 75%

2024 75%

Measure 1.1.1y (New): CIP will assign the case to a Member office within 21 

days of due date of final filing.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 100%

2024 100%

Measure 1.1.2a (Previously 1.2.1): The percentage of arbitration exceptions 

decided by the Authority within 365 days of the filing of exceptions.

Results Targets

2020 61% – (65/107 cases)

Not Met 2020 90%

2021 49% – (70/143 cases)

Not Met 2021 90%

2022 56% – (70/126 cases)

Not Met 2022 90%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A
47

Measure 1.1.2b (New): The percentage of arbitration exceptions decided by the 

Authority within 365 days of assignment to a Member office.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 75%

2024 75%

Measure 1.1.2c (Previously 1.2.2): The percentage of negotiability cases 

decided by the Authority within 365 days of the filing of a petition for review.

Results Targets

2020 84% – (27/32 cases)

Met 2020 75%

2021 86% – (68/79 cases)

Met 2021 75%

2022 75% – (50/67 cases)

Met 2022 75%

2023 75%

2024 75%

Measure 1.1.2d (Previously 1.2.3): The percentage of ULP cases decided by 

the Authority within 365 days of issuance of an OALJ decision.

Results Targets

2020 25% – (1/4 cases)

Not Met 2020 90%

2021 40% – 2/5 cases)

Not Met 2021 90%

2022 100% – 11/11 cases)

Met 2022 90%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Measure 1.1.2e (New): The percentage of ULP cases decided by the Authority 

within 365 days of assignment to a Member office.

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 90%

2024 90%
48

Measure 1.1.2f (Previously 1.2.4): The percentage of representation cases 

decided by the Authority within 365 days of the filing of an application for 

review.

Results Targets

2020 88% – (14/16 cases)

Not Met 2020 100%

2021 75% – (3/4 cases)

Not Met 2021 100%

2022 83% – (5/6 cases)

Not Met 2022 100%

2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Measure 1.1.2g (New): The percentage of representation cases decided by the 

Authority within 365 days of assignment to a Member office. 

Results Targets

2022 N/A 2022 N/A

2023 90%

2024 90%

Measure 1.1.2h (Previously 1.2.10): The percentage of ULP complaints 

issued by the General Counsel decided in the OALJ within 365 days of the 

complaint being issued. *

Results Targets

2020 N/A 2020 *

2021 100% – (2/2 cases)

Met 2021 95%

2022 100% – (27/27 cases)

Met 2022 95%

*OALJ performance standards remain to resolve 80 

percent of ULP complaints within 180 days of filing 

and 95 percent within 365 days.

2023 95%

2024 95%

Measure 1.1.2i (Previously 1.2.11): The percentage of ULP charges resolved 

by the OGC by complaint, withdrawal, dismissal, or settlement within 240 days 

of filing of the charge.

Results Targets

2020 99.9% (1806/1808 cases)

Met 2020 95%

2021 99.8% (2338/2343 cases)

Met 2021 95%

2022 98.6% (2616/2653 cases)

Met 2022 95%

2023 95%

2024 95%
49

Measure 1.1.2j (Previously 1.2.12): The percentage of representation cases 

resolved by the OGC through withdrawal, election, or issuance of a Decision 

and Order within 365 days of the filing of a petition.

Results Targets

2020 100% (175/175 cases)

Met 2020 95%

2021 100% (125/125 cases)

Met 2021 95%

2022 97% (161/167 cases)

Met 2022 95%

2023 95%

2024 95%

Measure 1.1.2k (Previously 1.2.13): The percentage of bargaining-impasse 

cases in which the FSIP declines jurisdiction within 140 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

2020 100% - (23/23 cases)

Met 2020 90%

2021 100% - (4/4 cases)

Met 2021 90%

2022 100% - (29/29 cases)

Met 2022 90%

2023 90%

2024 90%

Measure 1.1.2l (Previously 1.2.14): The percentage of bargaining-impasse 

cases that are voluntarily settled within 160 days of the date filed.

Results Targets

2020 85% – (11/13 cases)

Met 2020 80%

2021 100% – (2/2 cases)

Met 2021 80%

2022 100% – (38/38 cases)

Met 2022 80%

2023 80%

2024 80%
50

Measure 1.1.2m (Previously 1.2.15): The percentage of bargaining-impasse 

cases that the FSIP resolves through final action that are closed within 200 days 

of the date filed.

Results Targets

2020 88% – (35/40 cases)

Met 2020 80%

2021 95% – (20/21 cases)

Met 2021 80%

2022 100% – (15/15 cases)

Met 2022 80%

2023 80%

2024 80%

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: WE WILL PROMOTE STABILITY IN THE FEDERAL LABORMANAGEMENT COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING LEADERSHIP AND GUIDANCE 

THROUGH ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND EDUCATION

Key to the FLRA’s strategic objectives is to offer high-quality mediation, settlement 

conferences, outreach and prevention services as well as resources to promote more effective 

labor-management relations across the federal government. ADR is an informal process that 

allows parties to discuss and develop their interests in order to resolve the underlying issues 

and problems in their relationships. This includes interest-based conflict resolution and 

intervention services in pending ULP cases, representation cases, arbitration cases,

negotiability appeals, and bargaining-impasse disputes. 

FLRA also provides facilitation and training to help labor and management repair damaged 

workplace relationships and develop constructive relationships capable of solving difficult 

problems and making mission-critical decisions. Many of the OGC’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 preventing and resolving labormanagement disputes. The FLRA’s goals include delivering outreach, training, and facilitation 

services that significantly contribute to the FLRA’s mission, and ensuring that training 

participants evaluate FLRA training as highly effective.

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.1.1: PROVIDE TARGETED TRAINING, OUTREACH AND 

PREVENTION, AND FACILITATION ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE LABORMANAGEMENT COMMUNITY.

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.1.2: PROVIDE EFFECTIVE, USEFUL, UP-TO-DATE CASEPROCESSING AND CASE-LAW RESOURCES AND TRAININGS FOR THE LABORMANAGEMENT COMMUNITY.

Each FLRA component delivers training and outreach in a manner reflecting its unique 

expertise.

The OGC and Authority components deliver training and outreach services that have a 

statutory focus, which makes them appropriate for remote, online, and recorded media. Most of 

CADRO’s prevention services are offered in a different manner.
51

CADRO offers various prevention services that are designed to help party representatives 

more effectively and efficiently solve complex workplace problems and make important 

decisions, which can be especially difficult in traditional labor-management relationships. 

Communication skills, interest-based problem-solving skills, facilitation skills, collectivebargaining skills, dispute-resolution techniques, and effective advocacy in ADR forums are just 

some of what CADRO staff teach management and union representatives. For some parties, 

the goal is to repair severely damaged workplace relationships. For others, the goal is to 

improve the operation of a stable, traditional labor-management relationship. For yet others, 

CADRO staff help parties develop and implement a trajectory from a traditional labormanagement relationship to a highly collaborative labor-management partnership. Ultimately, 

CADRO offers these services to help parties improve mission performance, quality of work life, 

and day-to-day workplace relationships. In doing so, CADRO helps the FLRA exercise 

leadership in the manner envisioned by the Statute and by the President’s Executive Order on 

Worker Organizing and Empowerment (14025), his Executive Order Protecting the Federal 

Workforce (14003), and the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment 

Report adopted by the President.

In situations where parties experience labor-management challenges, targeted assistance can 

promote stable labor-management relationships by educating the parties regarding their 

statutory rights and obligations. It can also promote effective and efficient Government by 

assisting parties in addressing their disputes without necessarily resorting to formal filings. 

Additional targeted assistance may take various forms, including offering training to parties 

on particular topics that have given rise to frequent ULP charges, negotiability disputes, or 

arbitration exceptions. Other types of assistance might be most appropriate for parties 

experiencing broader labor-management challenges. For parties involved in complex 

representational matters, targeted assistance can include conducting conferences with the 

parties to assist them in identifying and, if feasible, resolving relevant issues.

Measure 2.1.1a (Previously 2.1.1): The number of training, labor-management 

improvement, outreach, and facilitation activities delivered.

Results Targets

FY 2020 20

Not Met

FY 2020 40

FY 2021 54

Met

FY 2021 40

FY 2022 76

Met

FY 2022 40

FY 2023 40

FY 2024 40
52

Measure 2.1.1b (Previously 2.1.2): The number of recipients of training, labormanagement improvement, outreach, and facilitation activities.*

Results Targets

FY 2020 2,780

Met

FY 2020 2.500

FY 2021 7,886

Met

FY 2021 2,500

FY 2022 18,791

Met

FY 2022 2,500

*Virtual training began in 2020 leading to significant 

increases in reach.

FY 2023 15,000

FY 2024 15,000

Measure 2.1.1c (Previously 2.1.3): The percentage of participant responders who 

highly rate the training that they received.

Results Targets

FY 2020 N/A FY 2020 80%

FY 2021 93%

Met

FY 2021 80%

FY 2022 96%

Met

FY 2022 80%

FY 2023 80%

FY 2024 80%

Measure 2.1.1d: (Previously 2.1.4): The number of times that on-demand online 

training is used.

Results Targets

FY 2022 15,000+

Met

FY 2022 1,000

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2023 1,000

FY 2024 1,000

PERFORMANCE GOAL 2.2.1: SUCCESSFUL RESOLUTION OF A SIGNIFICANT 

PORTION OF FLRA CASES THROUGH ADR.

Parties normally litigate because they want an answer to a legal question. Getting an answer 

to a legal question is not the same as solving the problem that gave rise to the legal question. 

A large percentage of parties to cases before FLRA elect to use our ADR services to prevent 

and solve workplace problems.

ADR is any type of dispute resolution process—other than litigation—that is administered by a 

3rd party. There are many types of ADR, from facilitative at one end of the spectrum, to 

evaluative at the other. Types of ADR used by skilled professionals at FLRA include 

mediation, facilitation, settlement conferences, and mediation-arbitration. Other ADR tools 

are also used when appropriate.
53

Measure 2.2.1a (Previously 2.2.1): Percentage of unfair labor practice cases where 

OGC offer of ADR is accepted and case is partially or fully resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2020 100%

Met

FY 2020 95%

FY 2021 99%

Met

FY 2021 95%

FY 2022 99%

Met

FY 2022 95%

FY 2023 95%

FY 2024 95%

Measure 2.2.1b (Previously 2.2.2): Percentage of representation cases where OGC 

offer of ADR is accepted and case is partially or fully resolved.

Results Targets

FY 2020 100%

Met

FY 2020 95%

FY 2021 100%

Met

FY 2021 95%

FY 2022 99%

Met

FY 2022 95%

FY 2023 95%

FY 2024 95%

Measure 2.2.1c (New): The percentage of appropriate ULP complaints in which ADR 

services are offered to the parties or ordered by the OALJ Chief Judge.

Results Targets

FY 2022 100%

Met

FY 2022 90%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2022 90%

FY 2023 90%

Measure 2.2.1d (New): The percentage of ULP cases that are partially or totally 

resolved after ADR services are accepted by the parties or ordered by the OALJ Chief 

Judge.

Results Targets

FY 2022 88%

Met

FY 2022 80%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2022 80%

FY 2023 80%
54

Measure 2.2.2a (New): The percentage of appropriate arbitration cases pending before 

the Authority in which ADR services are offered to the parties.

Results Targets

FY 2022 N/A FY 2022 N/A

* New FY 2022 Measure. Cases just started 8/2022 – Data 

forthcoming FY 2023 20%

FY 2024 50%

Measure 2.2.2b (New): The percentage of arbitration cases that are partially or totally 

resolved after the parties accept an offer of ADR services.

Results Targets

FY 2022 N/A FY 2022 N/A

* New FY 2022 Measure. Cases just started 8/2022 – Data 

forthcoming FY 2023 60%

FY 2024 60%

Measure 2.2.3a (New): The percentage of appropriate negotiability cases pending 

before the Authority in which ADR services are offered to the parties.

Results Targets

FY 2022 100%

Met

FY 2022 90%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2023 90%

FY 2024 90%

Measure 2.2.3b (New): The percentage of proposals or provisions in negotiability cases 

that are partially or totally resolved after the parties accept an offer of ADR services.

Results Targets

FY 2022 100% (170/170 cases)

Met

FY 2022 90%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2023 90%

FY 2024 90%

Measure 2.2.3c (New): The percentage of negotiability cases that are partially or 

totally resolved after the parties accept an offer of ADR services.

Results Targets

FY 2022 100% (13/13 cases)

Met

FY 2022 90%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2023 90%

FY 2024 90%
55

Measure 2.2.3d (New): The percentage of cases – other than ULP, arbitration, and 

negotiability – that are partially or totally resolved after parties accept an offer of ADR 

services.

Results Targets

FY 2022 100% (5/5 cases)

Met

FY 2022 75%

* New FY 2022 Measure. FY 2023 75%

FY 2024 75%

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: WE WILL MANAGE OUR RESOURCES EFFECTIVELY AND 

EFFICIENTLY IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE ORGANIZATIONAL EXCELLENCE

FLRA’s ability to fulfill its core mission under the Statute depends on excellent management of 

the organization and its resources. The organizational-excellence goal emphasizes how the 

Agency’s employees, IT infrastructure, and allocation of resources are central to achieving all 

of the strategic goals and objectives outlined in the strategic plan.

The landscape of the federal workplace and workforce continues to evolve, especially in light of 

COVID and the need to rapidly respond to the changing future of work. It is crucial to 

simultaneously focus on developing the workforce of the future while retaining valuable 

institutional knowledge.

The Agency is prepared to meet ever-changing business demands through the innovative use 

of IT to best manage the workload and interact with parties. FLRA continues to be an effective 

steward of taxpayer dollars. The Agency’s future operational approaches are designed to foster 

nimble and seamless deployment of resources coupled with cost-avoidance strategies to 

support productive labor-management relations across the federal government.

PERFORMANCE GOAL 3.1.1: DEMONSTRATE STRONG RECRUITMENT AND 

RETENTION PRACTICES.

Measure 3.1.1a (Previously 3.1.1): Demonstrable, strong recruitment and 

retention practices.

Results

2020 • Scheduled quarterly Diversity and Inclusion Team events and programs 

to highlight and celebrate diversity of Agency employees including 

Black History Month, Women’s History, Pride Month, Hispanic 

Heritage Month--provided pertinent resources/informational subject 

matter regarding diversity through weekly emails, published monthly 

newsletter and all employee intra-agency communications.
56

• Met or exceeded Government-wide standards for diversity and Schedule 

A hiring. Established contacts with organizations that assist 

individuals with disabilities in securing employment including: America 

Job Centers, state vocational rehabilitation agencies, the Veterans’ 

Vocational rehabilitation and Employment Program, Centers for 

Independent Living, and employment network service providers to 

ensure recruitment efforts include individuals with disabilities. The 

Agency also utilized the Schedule A hiring authority to fill critical 

vacancies this FY.

• Continued to support the Agency Diversity and Inclusion Team in their 

collective efforts to provide information to all FLRA employees.

• Increased recruitment efforts allowed the Agency to gather time-to-hire 

data in 2019 and 2020 to use to assess recruitment and staffing 

processes and procedures moving forward.

2021 • Conducted an agency-wide recruitment effort for additional members 

for the Agency Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Team. The team now 

has 15 members that we believe properly reflect the diversity of the 

Agency.

• Developed the official charter for the team that was approved by all 

members and established subcommittees to address the necessary 

actions in line with the new administration’s Executive Orders and 

mandates related to DE&I. The subcommittees include but are not 

limited to Training, Recruiting and Hiring, Agency Events, and Policy 

Review.

2022 • Continued to reinforce recruitment and retention of a diverse and 

inclusionary workforce.

• Developed an agency-wide workforce demographic survey to gain more 

in-depth information from agency employees to establish various 

employee groups and committees to facilitate diverse agency programs 

and policies.

• Deployed a new, automated Time and Attendance system and a more 

secure e-OPF (online Official Personnel Folder) system.

• Developed new and improved recruitment strategies based on overall 

time to hire assessments.

• Developed an Agency entrance and exit survey for all employees to gain 

data on incoming perceptions of the agency and why employees are 

leaving the agency. This Data will assist us in recruitment planning 

and providing the proper consultation to management for developing an 

effective recruitment strategy to successfully fill vacant positions.

Targets

2023 • Develop an expanded recruitment base that is inclusive of all 

communities to include individuals with disabilities, varied races, 

cultures, incomes, educations, social affiliations, intellectual 

perspectives, languages, religions, ethnicities and members of the 

LGBTQ+ communities.

• Continue automation improvements to include a performance 

management system.
57

• Effectively utilize the Agency’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion 

committee to gain new ideas from members of the agency to better 

recruit and, more importantly, retain a diverse workforce 

representative of the country.

• Establish an Employee Engagement program to raise awareness of how 

FLRA utilizes Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) results to 

strengthen a healthy organizational environment and effectiveness.

• Improve diversity at higher grade levels including supervisory, 

management, and senior Executive positions through leadership 

competencies development and strategic recruitment.

2024 • Strengthen internal Labor-Management Relations.

• Continue to ensure the safety and security of FLRA employees and 

customers.

• Improve leadership effectiveness to:

• Establish a safe environment for the workforce to share ideas, 

innovations and proposals concerning work within their subjectmatter areas;

• Empower the workforce to improve processes and results;

• Build trust and confidence in senior leadership integrity by 

communicating information which impacts the workforce early and 

often, including staff for pre-decisional input on work strategies, 

systems, tools, partners, and methods when feasible.

• Implement enhanced employee recognition, awards, and appreciation 

strategies.

• Measure onboarding effectiveness and new employee experiences.

PERFORMANCE GOAL 3.1.2: MAINTAIN AND GROW AGENCY EXPERTISE 

THROUGH EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT

Measure 3.1.2a (Restored): Maintain and grow agency expertise through employee 

development.

Results

2022 • Maintain an environment conducive for learning to include greater use 

of technology for online, “on demand” training and the ability to record 

training and information sessions with subsequent availability across 

the workforce as needed.

• Establishment of collaborative exchanges with the Small Agency 

Council (SAC) and the Interagency Human Resources (HR) Policy 

Community of Practice, for example, sharpens the capabilities of the 

Human Resources Division personnel. Sharing of information and 

resources among external organizations enhances perspective and 

facilitates compliance and agility to ensure timely implementation of 

HR regulations, programs, operations, policies, and strategies.

• Effective utilization of detail opportunities for experiential learning and 

optimal use of available talent. This increases knowledge of the 

operations, standards, and customer relations of other FLRA 

components.

Targets
58

2023 • Expand networks for training resources to include access to Department 

of the Interior (DOI) University training programs for the FLRA 

workforce.

• Justify an FTE in the Human Resources Division for an Organization 

Development and Engagement Specialist with functional 

responsibilities to integrate strategic planning of organizational goals 

with organizational performance. This involves subject-matter 

expertise in human capital management (e.g., program evaluation, 

accountability, employee engagement best practices) and talent 

management (e.g., employee and leadership development, succession 

planning, workforce planning).

• Deploy an automated performance management system to enhance 

records management, data collection and analysis, and operational 

efficiencies in tracking activities throughout the performance 

management cycle.

2024 • Establish a robust Leadership Development Program in-house or utilize 

external programs to strengthen readiness for promotion at every level 

and ensure a pool of diverse, prepared successors for supervisory, 

management, and executive-level opportunities.

• Explore mentoring programs and peer-to-peer training.

• Increase use of available Executive Resources services to support senior 

management officials through transitions; ensure executive leadership 

development; improve diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility at 

the highest levels of the agency; and staff Senior Executive Service 

(SES), Senior Level (SL), and Senior Technical (ST) vacancies.
59

PERFORMANCE GOAL 3.2.1: IMPROVE EFILING CAPABILITY AND 

MAXIMIZE ITS USE IN RECEIVING CASE FILINGS.

Measure 3.2.1a (Previously 3.2.1): Expand the use of electronic filing for all 

components.

Results

2020 • 56 percent of cases eFiled Agency-wide.

• 89 percent of Authority cases eFiled.

• OGC eFiling increased by 9.3 percent.

• Streamlined eFiling software & created eFiling training module.

2021 • 68 percent of cases eFiled Agency-wide.

• 78 percent of Authority cases eFiled.

• OGC eFiling increased by 14 percent.

• Research and planning began to vastly increase capabilities of the 

eFiling system to allow a wider array of case types/actions and 

interactions.

2022 • 77 percent of cases eFiled Agency-wide.

• 74 percent of OGC cases eFiled.

• OGC eFiling has increased 8% from FY21.

Targets

2023 • 80% of cases filed electronically.

• Critically review and revise FLRA regulations to modernize filing 

requirements.

2024 • Fully align procedural regulations for case submission with available 

technology resources (eFile, etc.) to eliminate costly legacy means.

• Draft new regulations to allow FLRA service by email, where 

appropriate. 
60

Measure 3.2.1b (Previously 3.2.2): Move FLRA towards 100% electronic case files, 

electronic permanent records, and electronic case management. 

Results

2020 • Developed Case Management System (CMS) for the Authority 

component of the FLRA. Developed electronic case file structure in the 

DMS and initial planning to automate creating the electronic folders 

from the CMS.

2021 • Combined original Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the four-phase plan to 

implement fully-electronic casefile. Developed and tested end-to-end 

electronic casefile for the Authority component, rolled out in late 2020.

2022 • Enhancements and improvements continue on Authority CMS. OGC 

CMS development hindered by lack of appropriated funds, but 

continues slowly.

Targets

2023 • OGC implement “electronic” ULP and REP case filing system for all 

new cases; eliminate use of analog case files.

• Continue development and implementation of end-to-end electronic 

casefile system for all FLRA components.

2024 • Continue development and implementation of end-to-end electronic 

casefile system for all FLRA components. Align Agency policies and 

procedures for full acceptance of fully Electronic Casefile.

PERFORMANCE GOAL 3.2.2: ENHANCE EMPLOYEE TECHNOLOGY USAGE 

AND SKILLS AT EVERY LEVEL

Measure 3.2.2a (New) (Previously 3.2.3): Achieve an exceptional level of 

information security by increasing the percentage of systems using a zero-trust model 

and multifactor authentication and by promptly complying with cybersecurity orders 

and directives.

Results

2021 *New Measure for 2022

2022 • 75% of systems using Zero Trust model, CISA-Standard CDM and EDR 

implemented fully

Targets

2023 • 90% of systems using Zero Trust model; Multifactor Authentication in 

use for all externally provided systems

2024 • 100% Zero Trust architecture, MFA in all internal and external facing 

systems.
61

Measure 3.2.2b (Previously 3b-4): Assess how internal and external customers 

perceive the effectiveness of the Agency’s IT modernization efforts. 

Results

2020 • Produced & administered a survey to assess employees’ response to the 

new WebEx system rolled out during pandemic in 2020.

• Employee Engagement Team & FLRA Pandemic Task Force jointly 

produced a survey to gather information on best practices, needs, to 

assess overall response to maximum telework, and to invite personnel 

to raise return to workplace concerns (77 percent respondents—positive 

results).

• Received a well-above-positive response to managers’ survey questions 

on how IT is functioning during maximum telework mode.

• Reinstated the Technology Council in order to directly gather feedback 

and actionable input regarding IT modernization efforts.

• Administered internal survey to assess how FLRA employees perceive 

the effectiveness of the Agency’s IT modernization efforts.

2021 • Received overwhelmingly positive comments about the effort to move 

from legacy DMS solution to new integrated DMS.

2022 • Used surveys and focus group meetings to assess the success and 

acceptance of the migration out of iManage and into SharePoint. 

Achieved about 90% satisfaction with both the new resource and the 

migration effort.

Targets

2023 • Continue to administer targeted surveys to assess usability of proposed 

broad changes and enhancements to eFiling and case-management.

• Apply lessons learned and improve surveying for Agency migration of 

video and telephony services to a cloud platform.

• Maintain open dialog with internal and external customers to best 

diagnose, assess, and plan future fixes and enhancements.

2024 • Continue to administer targeted surveys to assess usability of changes, 

fixes, and enhancements to the eFiling system and the Authority 

component CMS.

• Apply lessons learned and improve surveying for new development 

work for the OGC Component Case Management System.

• Maintain open dialog with internal and external customers to best 

diagnose, assess, and plan future fixes and enhancements.
62

PERFORMANCE GOAL 3.3.1: ACHIEVE HIGH INTERNAL CUSTOMERSERVICE SCORES ON DELIVERY OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

Measure 3.3.1a (New) (Previously 3.1.2): Improvement in overall employee job 

satisfaction, as demonstrated through the score for question 42 of the Federal 

Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS).

Year Results Targets

Reported in 2020 62% satisfied in 2019

Reported in 2021 73% satisfied in 2020

Reported in 2022 73% satisfied in 2021

Reported in 2023 TBD satisfied in 2022 75% satisfied

Reported in 2024 77% satisfied

LEGACY STRATEGIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND MEASURES

As part of FLRA’s ongoing performance planning, FLRA continually reviews and/or 

updates its performance measures. Including with the development of its 2022-2026 

Strategic plan, replacing, rewording, or eliminating, outdated or irrelevant goals, 

objectives and measures. Agency legacy measures are listed here.

Measure 1.1.1u (Previously 1.1.15): The average age of bargaining-impasse 

cases in which the FSIP declines jurisdiction.

Results Targets

2020 70 days (23 cases)

Met 2020 90 days

2021 64 days (4 cases)

Met 2021 81 days

2022 54 days (29 cases)

Met 2022 75 days

*Measure discontinued for FY2023. 2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Measure 1.1.1v (New *) (Previously 1.1.16): The average age of bargainingimpasse cases that are voluntarily settled.

Results Targets

2021 73 days

Met 2021 120 days

2022 84 days

Met 2022 120 days

*Measure discontinued for FY2023. 2023 N/A

2024 N/A
63

Measure 1.1.1w (Previously 1.1.17): The average age of bargaining-impasse 

cases that the FSIP resolves through final action.

Results Targets

2020 162 days (40 cases)

Not met 2020 146 days

2021 137 days (21 cases)

Met 2021 154 days

2022 105 days (15 cases)

Met 2022 150 days

*Measure discontinued for FY2023. 2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Previously Measure 1.1.4: The percentage of negotiability cases decided by the 

Authority within 300 days of the filing of a petition for review.

Results Targets

2020 78% – (25/32 cases)

Met 2020 75%

2021 73% – (58/79 cases)

Not Met 2021 75%

2022 73% – (49/67 cases)

Not Met 2022 75%

*Measure discontinued for FY2023. 2023 N/A

2024 N/A

Legacy Performance Goal 1b-1: Conduct high-quality investigations and produce 

high-quality written work products.

Measure 1b-1: Establish and surpass case-processing quality goals.

Results

2020 Updated all performance standards to include a quality standard. Monitored quality 

and evaluated through end-of-year performance evaluations.

Developed and instituted Agency-wide informal training program using brown bag 

sessions.

Conducted internal legal writing training for Authority attorneys and legal interns.

Following an internal survey on training needs, provided unlimited access to “West 

Legal Ed” for multitude training opportunities - ideal remote training opportunity 

during maximum telework/social distancing.

Increased emphasis on well written cases, in compliance with the Plain Writing Act 

and as mentioned by Chairman Kiko and Member Abbott in the August 2020 FDR 

conference video.

2021 Authority has eliminated redundancies in its decisions by weaving the parties’ 

arguments into the analysis portion of decisions, rather than initially setting forth the 

parties’ arguments and then restating them in the analysis. 

By moving all legal citations to footnotes – instead of placing them in text – Authority 

decisions are now more readable because the citations do not interrupt the flow of 

sentences. 

Recitation of frequently applied legal standards and disposition of minor issues are 

increasingly relegated to footnotes so that the main text is more streamlined.

Plain-language principles applied to FLRA website: active voice; improved 

organization by case types; visually engaging design, simplified global navigation, 
64

improved usability and search function, all-new substantive content, and a convenient 

training-registration tool.

Targets

2020 Target areas for improvement in case-processing quality, based on data gathered from 

internal tool(s) and survey results.

Set case-quality goals, as measured by surveys or other quality assessment tools. 

2021 Written work products should reflect an increase in quality, as measured by the tools.

2022 Written work products should reflect an increase in quality, as measured by the tools.

Legacy Performance Goal 1b-2: Implement effective methods to maintain and 

improve the quality of FLRA investigations and written work products, including 

FLRA staff training and internal education resources.

Legacy Measure 1b-2: Train FLRA staff and provide internal educational resources 

to improve the quality of investigations and written work products.

Results

2020 Conducted in-house Casework Training in early March 2020.

Conducted internal legal writing training for Authority. attorneys and legal interns.

See also 2020 results in Measure 1b-1.

2021 Professional development budget was set at $1000 per employee, allowing each 

staffer to take one or conceivably two professional development courses as desired.

Targets

2020 Target ways to improve the effectiveness of internal educational resources based on 

survey results.

Show a 10 percent increase in the effectiveness of internal educational resources, as 

measured by internal survey instruments or other measures developed in 2019. 

2021 Continue to make necessary adjustments to maximize efficiency of internal training 

programs.

Increase professional development options for FLRA staff in order to improve the 

quality of investigations and written work products.

2022 Continue to make necessary adjustments to maximize efficiency of internal training 

programs.

Increase professional development options for FLRA staff in order to improve the 

quality of investigations and written work products.

Legacy Performance Goal 1b-3: Ensure external stakeholder confidence in FLRA’s 

abilities. 

Legacy Measure 1b-3: Customer perceptions about FLRA’s impartiality. 

Results

2020 COVID-19 delayed implementation of pilot survey – will carry over to 2021

2021 COVID-19 and change in leadership delayed implementation of pilot survey

Targets

2020 Maintain or improve overall perceptions about FLRA’s impartiality year over year.

Pilot external survey. 

2021 Deliver external survey electronically with every final agency action and evaluate 

results. 

2022 Deliver external survey electronically with every final agency action and evaluate 

results.
65

Legacy Measure 2a: Expand the relevancy, currency, and reach of educational tools. 

Results

2020 FLRA issued two press releases announcing seven online training sessions Agency-wide.

FLRA produced and published several training videos on a new YouTube channel

(Youtube.com/c/FederalLaborRelationsAuthority) Also posting five pre-recorded training 

modules on FLRA.gov

YouTube trainings plus those currently on the website. 

Continue to provide case digest summaries for all Authority decisions. To date, the 

Authority has published approximately 205 digests. 

Quarterly digests reports are up to date and were announced in a press release. 

Requested public comment on proposed negotiability regulations.

Agency updated its union-dues-revocation regulation. 

Conducted live-stream training.

Requested public comment via Federal Register notice on four policy statement requests.

Agency issued five policy statements. 

Updated OGC Representation Case Outline.

2021 Expanded the number of animated YouTube training available on 

(Youtube.com/c/FederalLaborRelationsAuthority).

FLRA issued two press releases announcing ten online training sessions Agency-wide.

The topics covered in the videos are eFiling, Unfair Labor Practice Investigations, 

Timeliness under Section 7118(a)(4), and Investigatory Examinations (a seven-lesson 

course).

Quarterly case digest reports continued.

Targets

2020 Critically review and update the relevancy and currency of Agency regulations.

Update 2 guides or manuals Agency-wide.

Offer 7 training sessions online Agency-wide.

Continue to provide case digest summaries for all Authority decisions. Provide OGC and 

FSIP case digests, if deemed appropriate.

2021 Critically review and update the relevancy and currency of Agency regulations.

Update remaining guides or manuals Agency-wide as needed.

Offer 10 additional training sessions online as developed.

Continue to provide case digest summaries for all Authority decisions. Provide OGC and 

FSIP case digests, if deemed appropriate.

2022 Continue to expand online resources.

Continue to provide case digest summaries for all Authority decisions. Provide OGC and 

FSIP case digests, if deemed appropriate.

Legacy Measure 2b: Develop and implement a highly effective, totally voluntary 

targeted-assistance program and related procedures.

Results

2020 FLRA conducted 16 customer trainings.

Authority & FSIP lawyers successfully trained FMCS mediators.

The Authority and FMCS developed a shared electronic case-management system to 

track the status of referred NEG cases.

In December 2019, began referring NEG cases to FMCS mediators.
66

To date, FMCS has narrowed – or entirely resolved – the negotiability dispute in 50 

percent (5/10) of referred cases.

To date, FMCS mediators assisted parties in resolving 71 percent (82/117) of the 

proposals/provisions referred to mediation.

Authority and FMCS project leaders confer regularly to refine and apply metrics for 

measuring success.

FLRA implemented a PDF questionnaire for customers to be used in representation cases 

(implemented during COVID-19).

Virtual REP hearings procedures were put into place. 

Addressed specific requests of parties for targeted training.

2021 CADRO was restored.

FMCS mediation pilot program was terminated.

Targets

2020 Train FMCS mediators and support the pilot mediation program.

Establish metrics for evaluating mediation program.

Evaluate the effectiveness of the targeted-assistance program using the metrics 

established in 2019.

Make necessary refinements and improvements based on customer feedback.

Increase the program’s overall success as measured by the metrics established in 2019.

2021 Evaluate the effectiveness of the FMCS mediation pilot program using metrics 

established in 2020.

Continue to evaluate the targeted-assistance program.

2022 With the re-establishment of CADRO, FLRA will discontinue this measure.

Legacy Measure 3a: Align performance-management systems and individual 

performance plans with current Strategic Plan.

Results

2020 Completed the development of revised performance plans for all attorney positions and 

rolled them out for 2020 performance year.

Assessing employees’ perceptions that performance management systems align with the

legacy Strategic Plan via FEVS. In FEVS 2020 results, 90.8 percent of employees 

“Know how my work relates to the agency’s goals,” up from 79.2 percent in 2019.

Completed the development of revised performance plans for all non-attorney and 

manager positions.

Completed the review of, and updated, the Agency’s GS performance management 

system’s policy and the Agency’s attorney individual performance plans to ensure they 

align directly with the 2018-2022 Strategic Plan.

Created the new SL performance plans.

2021 Evaluated pilot and revise performance plans as appropriate.

Managers added whistleblower protection information to performance plans.

Completed the development of revised performance plans for all remaining positions.

Targets

2020 Develop revised performance plans for remaining positions.
67

Pilot all revised performance plans.

Implement appropriate communications strategies and educational tools to successfully 

achieve the transition. 

2021 Evaluate pilot and revise performance plans as appropriate.

Managers add whistleblower protection information to performance plans.

Completed the development of revised performance plans for all remaining positions.

2022 FLRA will discontinue this measure following the alignment of performance plans and 

systems with the legacy Strategic Plan.

Legacy Measure 3b-3: Internal and external customer perceptions of the eFiling 

System.

Results

2020 Received feedback from external users via the provided engagement email address. 

Implemented suggestions and replied to customer feedback.

Streamlined the eFiling system & created eFiling training module.

2021 Implemented significant fixes and enhancements in response to customer feedback.

Integrated new eFiling user registration approval mechanism in CMS.

Targets

2020 Maintain or improve positive responses to internal and external survey instruments.

Adopt suggested enhancements to the eFiling System, as appropriate.

2021 Maintain or improve positive responses to internal and external survey instruments.

Adopt suggested enhancements to the eFiling System, as appropriate.

2022 FLRA will discontinue this measure; will measure through the engagement email address.
1

U.S. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

1400 K Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20424

FLRA.gov