Click here to view the decision.
57 FLRA No. 45
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Patent Office Professional Association, Case Nos. WA-CA-80405 & WA-CA-80515 (Decided May 24, 2001)
In Case No. WA-CA-80405, the complaint alleged that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, by: (1) not replying to an April 20, 1998, memorandum from the Charging Party which stated that the Charging Party wished to resume negotiations over the subject of performance appraisals, and (2) refusing to negotiate with the Charging Party over the matter since April 20, 1998.
In Case No. WA-CA-80515, the complaint alleged that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute by: (1) establishing a Recruitment Bonus Plan for certain unit employees on or about January 6, 1998; (2) holding a job fair at which it offered recruitment bonuses to prospective job applicants on or about January 23 and 24, 1998; (3) sending the Charging Party memoranda dated January 28 and February 20, 1998, agreeing to bargain over recruitment bonuses and relocation allowances, but not over other subjects raised in the Charging Party's January 9, 1998 memorandum and attachment; (4) refusing to bargain on March 3, 1998 and on unspecified subsequent occasions on subjects addressed by bargaining proposals offered by the Charging Party on January 9, 1998, except for recruitment bonuses and relocation allowances; and (5) paying such bonuses to certain employees hired in February 1998 and thereafter.
The Judge found that the Respondent violated the Statute as alleged and ordered the Respondent to cease and desist from its unlawful conduct and to bargain retroactively with the Charging Party on its bargaining requests as provided in the respective recommended Orders. The Authority adopted the Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommended Order to the extent consistent with this decision.
Regarding case, WA-CA-80405, the Authority concluded that the Judge did not err by finding that the parties had established past practices with respect to certain provisions that had been disapproved by the Agency Head, nor by finding that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute by failing to bargain over union-initiated proposals.
As to case WA-CA-80515, the Authority concluded that the Judge did not err by finding that the parties had established past practices with respect to certain provisions that had been disapproved by the Agency Head, nor by finding that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute by failing to bargain over union-initiated proposals.