The appeals court opinion said the FLRA erroneously found
that “the agency has exercised its right to determine its
internal security by having employees who are trained and
qualified to carry firearms maintain possession and
access to their weapons when off duty” – and that this
finding was pivotal to the FLRA’s conclusion that the
proposal would interfere with the agency from exercising
its management rights.
It said the agency record did not support the FLRA’s
description of Customs’ security policy, because the
agency provides on-site firearm storage for off-duty
officers in many locations.
It added, “The most the proposal would require is the
institution at other facilities of a method of carrying
out agency internal security policies already in place
at some locations.”
The FLRA will need to decide if the proposal could be an
appropriate arrangement “based on the record before it,
and by a process consistent with its own precedent,” said
the appeals court.
NTEU said the decision might be useful in challenging
management rights in other cases.
http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/04opinions/04-1157a.pdf
