|
|
|
|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY CHARGE AGAINST AN AGENCY 1.
Charged Activity or
Agency
2. Charging Party (Labor Organization or Individual)
3.
Charged Activity or
Agency Contact Information
4. Charging Party Contact Information 5. Which subsection(s) of 5 U.S.C. 7116(a) do you believe have been violated? [See reverse] (1) and...(8) 6. Tell exactly WHAT the activity (or agency) did. Start with the DATE and LOCATION, state WHO was Involved, including titles. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7113, the Association of Civilian Technicians (ACT) has national consultation rights in connection with the United States Department of Defense, the United States Department of the Air Force, and the National Guard Bureau (NGB), regarding employees who are Air National Guard technicians employed under 32 U.S.C. § 709, In July, 2004, the Department of the Air Force and the National Guard Bureau, by message sent from CMSgt Ron Smith, issued an order (copy attached) stating: A fitness assessment composite score of 75 or greater is required for all members to includeAir National Guard personnel to graduate from formal technical training. All ANG personnel attending technical training whether in a military or technician status Will participate in the school's fitness program. By telephone call August 10, 2004. CMSgt Ron Smith informed Thomas G. Bastas, ACT National President, that the fitness score graduation requirement, as well as the fitness program participation requirement, applies to Air National Guard technicians employed under 32 U.S.C, § 709 who attend technical training schools. CMSgt Smith also informed Mr. Bastas that these technicians would attend technical training schools in technician status-that is, civilian employment status-because money is not available for them to attend in military status. The fitness score graduation requirement and fitness program participation requirement. as applied to technicians, are technician conditions of employment. They are, by themselves, conditions of employment. Depending on the circumstances. moreover, failure to meet either requirement could be the basis for an adverse performance appraisal, an adverse portion of a performance appraisal, disciplinary action, or loss of employment by reduction in force due to failure to qualify (solely by reason of failure to graduate from training, solely by reason of not attaining the requisite fitness score) for positions not eliminated as part of the force reduction. Although the July, 2004, message said it was a "clarification" of ANGI1D-248, the message in fact was a substantive change in technician conditions of employment (or at least a proposed substantive change in technician conditions of employment, to the extent implementation is not Immediate). ANGI1D-248, issued April 9, 2004. (excerpt attached) indicates that it does not apply at all technicians. It states that it applies, not to technicians, but "to all _r National Guard (ANG) Title 32 Active Guard Reserve (AGR) and Traditional Guard members." Before issuance of the July, 2004, message, technicians attending technical training schools either attended in military status or, if they attended in technician status, they were not required to meet any fitness score requirement as a condition of graduation and were not required to participate in the school's fitness program. Prior to issuing the July, 2004, message, the agency did not afford ACT its national consultation rights. The agency did not inform ACT that it proposed to issue the July, 2004, message in advance of the agency's issuing it. The agency has not informed ACT of the issuance of the July. 2004, message at any time after its issuance. The agency did not afford ACT reasonable time to present its views and recommendations regarding the July, 2004, message prior to its issuance, and has not done so at any time thereafter. The agency's failure to afford ACT its national consultation rights prior to issuing the July, 2004, message, or at any time thereafter, was, and has continued to be an unfair labor practice. The agency should be ordered to rescind the July, 2004, message, to the extent it changes technician conditions of employment, and to rescind all actions affecting technicians taken pursuant to the July, 2004, message, until the agency has afforded the union its national consultation rights. See, National Guard Bureau and Association of Civilian Technicians, 57 FLRA No. 50 (June 6, 2001) (failure to afford union national consultation rights prior to issuance of Position Description Release was unfair labor practice warranting status quo ante relief). This charge was served by first class mail this 12th day of August, 2004 to: Secretary
of the Air Force The Pentagon and Chief, National Guard
Bureau |