Favorable Arbitration Decision Regarding Rights to Part-Time Work Schedules

 March 3, 2008

 M E M O R A N D U M       

TO:      IRS Chapter Presidents

RE:            Favorable Arbitration Decision Regarding Rights to Part-Time Work Schedules

Summary:  An arbitrator ordered the IRS to grant an employee’s request for a part-time schedule needed to meet family responsibilities.

 Under the NTEU-IRS National Agreement, Article 22, Section 3, the IRS is required to make part-time work available to interested employees “to the maximum extent possible,” and may only deny part-time schedule requests for “just cause.”  Unfortunately, despite this clear contract language, employees sometimes find their requests for part-time schedules denied without a sound business reason.  A recent arbitration victory clarifies and reinforces the broad contract benefits provided and the limits on the agency’s ability to deny part-time schedule requests.

 The case arose in Chapter 85 (Las Vegas), where a TCO requested to reduce her full-time schedule to a schedule of six hours per day and 30 hours per week, so she could more closely supervise her teenage son.  The grievant’s son was using drugs and exhibiting other behavioral problems that eventually led to his expulsion from school.  Her managers summarily denied the grievant’s multiple requests to work part-time, referring generally to “workload” and “staffing” concerns without providing any details.  At the hearing, the agency sought to support its denial through testimony about short-staffing in the TCO function, citing that only 11 of 18 needed positions in the territory were encumbered.  Agency witnesses admitted during the hearing that they knew very little about the grievant’s reasons for requesting the part-time schedule.

 In ruling for the union, the arbitrator noted the grievant’s reasons for requesting the part-time schedule fell squarely within provisions of Article 22 Section 3, which identify family responsibilities as one of several situations where part-time employment is “particularly appropriate.”  The arbitrator found the IRS’s actions in reviewing and denying the request insufficient to meet the contract standards, because the agency failed to properly consider the grievant’s family responsibilities and failed to provide specific reasons for the denial.  The arbitrator rejected the IRS’s claims about workload and staffing as too vague, noting: merely showing a minimal effect on mission requirements by itself is not sufficient for the Agency to meet its burden of establishing just cause… [t]he Parties intended more when they agreed to Article 22, Section 3 B.1.

The arbitrator also rejected the agency’s arguments that enforcement of the part-time contract provisions would interfere with its management rights.  The arbitrator ordered the IRS to place the grievant in her requested part-time schedule until her son completes high school.

 

 

                                                                        Colleen M. Kelley

                                                                        National President