Click here to view the decision.
60 FLRA No. 29
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 2830 and U. S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Washington, D.C. Case 0-NG- 2746 (Decided August 10, 2004)
This case concerned the negotiability of one proposal which the Authority found to be outside the duty to bargain. With regards to the issue of privacy, the Authority found the Union's reliance on privacy-related rights and precedent unpersuasive because the employees have no reasonable expectation of privacy when using the Agency computer system.
The Authority also found that the proposal affected management's rights to direct employees and assign work under § 7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Statute. Management's right to discipline employees under § 7106(a)(2)(A) of the Statute includes the right to investigate to determine whether discipline is justified. Proposals that limit an agency's use of an appropriate investigative technique to uncover conduct subject to disciplinary actions directly interfere with management's right to discipline. The proposal in this case also involved telephone use as well as computer use, but the difference between monitoring telephones and monitoring telephones and computers is not significant because both situations attempt to limit the monitoring of employee conduct. Because the proposal would preclude the Agency from monitoring telephone and computer usage as a means of investigating employee conduct, the proposal affected management's right to discipline. The Authority also concluded that the proposal affected management's right to discipline under § 7106(a)(2)(A).