B-209269 L/M, FEB 28, 1983, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL
Highlights
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 19. ON THAT ISSUE SINCE YOU WERE NOT SERVED A COPY OF THE REQUEST AS PROVIDED UNDER OUR REGULATIONS IN 4 C.F.R. YOU CONTEND THAT OUR LETTER DEALT WITH A MATTER WHICH IS NOW A GRIEVANCE UNDER THE NEGOTIATED PROCEDURES OF YOUR NATIONAL AGREEMENT WITH GSA. YOU REQUEST A COPY OF SERVICE ON THE UNION IF SUCH SERVICE WAS MADE. OUR LETTER TO GSA WAS IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY FROM GSA DATED SEPTEMBER 24. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WAS NO REASON FOR OUR OFFICE TO REQUIRE SERVICE OF THE LETTER FROM GSA UPON YOUR UNION. WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT THE SAME OR SIMILAR ISSUE WAS BEING GRIEVED BY YOUR UNION. WE DECLINED TO ISSUE A DECISION ON A MATTER THAT WAS PENDING IN FEDERAL COURT.
B-209269 L/M, FEB 28, 1983, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL
PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE
MR. JOHN W. MULHOLLAND, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES:
THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 19, 1982, REFERENCE 12J/GSA, CONCERNING THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL AGENCIES PAYING TRAVEL AND PER DIEM EXPENSES TO EMPLOYEES NEGOTIATING A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF A LABOR UNION.
YOUR LETTER TAKES EXCEPTION TO OUR LETTER TO THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (GSA), B-209269, OCTOBER 27, 1982, ON THAT ISSUE SINCE YOU WERE NOT SERVED A COPY OF THE REQUEST AS PROVIDED UNDER OUR REGULATIONS IN 4 C.F.R. SEC. 22.4 (1982). IN ADDITION, YOU CONTEND THAT OUR LETTER DEALT WITH A MATTER WHICH IS NOW A GRIEVANCE UNDER THE NEGOTIATED PROCEDURES OF YOUR NATIONAL AGREEMENT WITH GSA. THEREFORE, YOU REQUEST A COPY OF SERVICE ON THE UNION IF SUCH SERVICE WAS MADE, AND YOU REQUEST THAT THE OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION BE WITHDRAWN.
OUR LETTER TO GSA WAS IN RESPONSE TO AN INQUIRY FROM GSA DATED SEPTEMBER 24, 1982, CONCERNING A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT BETWEEN GSA AND LOCAL 1817 OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES (NFFE) WHICH HAD NOT YET BEEN RATIFIED BY THE APPROPRIATE GSA OFFICIAL. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WAS NO REASON FOR OUR OFFICE TO REQUIRE SERVICE OF THE LETTER FROM GSA UPON YOUR UNION. THE ISSUE PRESENTED BY GSA INVOLVED ANOTHER UNION, NFFE, AND WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT THE SAME OR SIMILAR ISSUE WAS BEING GRIEVED BY YOUR UNION.
AS OUR LETTER TO GSA INDICATES, WE DECLINED TO ISSUE A DECISION ON A MATTER THAT WAS PENDING IN FEDERAL COURT, AND WE RECOMMENDED TO GSA THAT THE STATUS QUO BE MAINTAINED WHILE THE ISSUE WAS PRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.
OUR LETTER ADDRESSED THE SITUATION INVOLVING GSA AND NFFE, AND SINCE NEITHER PARTY HAS REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF OUR OPINION, WE DECLINE TO WITHDRAW OUR OPINION.
WE TRUST THIS IS RESPONSIVE TO YOUR INQUIRY.