Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Ft. Stewart Schools v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Supreme Court of the United States

January 10, 1990, Argued ; May 29, 1990, Decided

No. 89-65

Opinion

 [*643]  [***666]  [**2045]    JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.

 In this case we review the decision of the Federal Labor Relations Authority that petitioner Fort Stewart Schools, a Federal Government employer, is required to bargain with the labor union representing its employees over a proposal relating to wages and fringe benefits.

Respondent Fort Stewart Association of Educators (Union), is the collective-bargaining representative of the employees of two elementary schools at Fort Stewart, a United States military facility in Georgia. The schools, petitioner here, are owned and operated by the United States Army under authority of 64 Stat. 1107, ] 20 U.S.C. § 241(a), which directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to "make such arrangements . . . as may be necessary to provide free public education" for children living on federally owned property. The present controversy arose when, during the course of collective-bargaining negotiations, the Union submitted to the schools proposals relating to mileage reimbursement, various types of paid leave, and a salary increase.  Petitioner declined to negotiate these matters, claiming that they  [****6]  were not subject to bargaining under Title VII of the Civil Service  [***667]  Reform Act of 1978, sometimes referred  [*644]  to as the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq. (FSLMRS or Statute).  The Union sought the aid of the Federal Labor Relations Authority pursuant to §§ 7105(a)(2)(D) and (E) and the Authority held that the Union's proposals were negotiable. Fort Stewart Assn. of Educators, 28 F.L.R.A. 547 (1987). Upon a petition for review by petitioner and cross-petitions for enforcement by the Authority and the Union, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Authority's decision, 860 F. 2d 396 (1988), and we granted certiorari, 493 U.S. 807 (1989).

] The FSLMRS requires a federal agency to negotiate in good faith with the chosen representative of employees covered by the Statute, 5 U.S.C. § 7114(a)(4), and makes it an unfair labor practice to refuse to do so, § 7116(a)(5). The scope of the negotiating obligation is set forth in § 7102, which confers upon covered employees the right, through their chosen representative, "to engage  [**2046]  in collective bargaining with respect to conditions of employment." § 7102(2). Section  [****7]  7103(a)(14) defines "conditions of employment" as follows:

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

495 U.S. 641 *; 110 S. Ct. 2043 **; 109 L. Ed. 2d 659 ***; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 2692 ****; 58 U.S.L.W. 4624; 134 L.R.R.M. 2257; 12 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1606

FORT STEWART SCHOOLS v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY ET AL.

Prior History:  [****1]  CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT.

Disposition:  860 F. 2d 396, affirmed.

CORE TERMS

regulation, bargaining, budget, employment condition, proposals, employees, matters, wages, benefits, schools, working conditions, negotiate, salaries, costs, compelling need, fringe benefit, teachers', compensating, specifically provide, expenditure, unavoidable, comparable, Relations, practices, prerogative, conditions, implements, Schedules, offset

Education Law, Departments of Education, US Department of Education, US Department of Education Authority, Governments, Federal Government, Property, Elections, Labor & Employment Law, Collective Bargaining & Labor Relations, Unfair Labor Practices, General Overview, Employees & Officials, Faculty & Staff, Compensation, Payment, Salary Schedules, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Standards of Review, Military & Veterans Law, Servicemembers, Agency Adjudication, Business & Corporate Compliance, Labor & Employment Law, Duty to Bargain, Agency Rulemaking