Local 2047, Am. Federation of Government Emp. v. Defense General Supply Center

Decision Date27 March 1978
Docket NumberNo. 77-1145,77-1145
Citation573 F.2d 184
Parties97 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3207 LOCAL 2047, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, Appellant, v. DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

Jay J. Levit, Richmond, Va. (Stallard & Levit, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellant.

Robert W. Jaspen, Asst. U. S. Atty., Richmond, Va. (William B. Cummings, U. S. Atty., Alexandria, Va., on brief), for appellee.

Before WINTER, WIDENER and HALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Local 2047, American Federation of Government Employees (the union), sued Defense General Supply Center (the employer) to enforce a contractual right to certain employment and personnel data created by a collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The agreement had been entered into on January 14, 1972. While the employer does not dispute the union's contractual right to the data, it justified its refusal to supply it by the prohibitions of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, effective September 27, 1975, and the regulations and policies promulgated thereunder. The district court granted summary judgment for the employer, and we affirm.

We are essentially in agreement with the reasoning of the district court as set forth in its memorandum decision, Local 2047 American Federation of Government Employees v. Defense General Supply Center, 423 F.Supp. 481 (E.D.Va.1976). 1

Both Executive Order No. 11491 under which the collective bargaining agreement was negotiated and the agreement itself provide that the administration of all matters covered by the agreement is governed by existing or future laws and regulations of appropriate authorities, including policies set forth in the Federal Personnel Manual. The Privacy Act, together with regulations and policies formulated thereunder, thus controls. The Act prohibits the disclosure of all of the information to which the union has a contractual right unless such information is disclosed for a "routine use," § 552a(b)(3). 2 The current regulations and policies of the Civil Service Commission 3 interpret "routine use" to deny to the union, absent the consent of employees who are identified by name, (a) copies of retention registers for each competitive level subject to reduction in force and informational copies of reduction in force notices affecting unit employees where the names of the employees are disclosed; 4 (b) names of employees suspected of abusing sick leave, names of employees with excessive unscheduled emergency leave and names of employees continually late for duty; (c) a copy of the justification furnished to the Office of Civilian Personnel when an employee who is a qualified candidate and who is entitled to priority consideration for repromotion fails to be selected; and (d) information copies of letters of warning, proposed disciplinary actions, proposed adverse action, and the like.

The union asserts that a regulation or administrative interpretation adopted under the provisions of the Act cannot abrogate a provision of the contract if the regulation or administrative interpretation is unreasonable. Without deciding that this is necessarily the correct test to be applied, we adopt it for the purposes of decision in this case. Manifestly, the information that the union seeks is of an actual or a potential derogatory nature with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Doe v. General Services Admin., Civ. A. No. M-81-2109.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • 27 Julio 1982
    ...2047, American Federation of Government Employees v. Defense General Supply Center, 423 F.Supp. 481, 485-86 (E.D.Va.1976), aff'd, 573 F.2d 184 (4th Cir. 1978). To control such disclosure, Congress prohibited the release of any information covered by the Privacy Act without the consent of th......
  • DePlanche v. Califano, K 77-371.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District Michigan)
    • 4 Octubre 1982
    ...in Local 2047, American Federation of Government Employees v. Defense General Supply Center, 423 F.Supp. 481 (S.D.Va.1976), aff'd by 573 F.2d 184 (CA 4 1978). There, a labor organization representing certain government employees, had been entitled, under a collective bargaining agreement, t......
  • Florida Medical Ass'n v. DEPT. OF HEALTH, ED., ETC., 78-178-Civ-J-S.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • 22 Octubre 1979
    ...1978); Local 2047, Amer. Fed. of Gov't Employees v. Defense Gen. Supply Center, 423 F.Supp. 481, 485 and n. 9 (E.D.Va.1976), aff'd 573 F.2d 184 (4th Cir. 1978). Cf. also, H.R. 16373 and accompanying H.Rep. No. 1416 (Oct. 2, 1974), with S. 3418 and accompanying S.Rep. No. 1183 (Sept. 26, 197......
  • Detroit Edison Company v. National Labor Relations Board
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 5 Marzo 1979
    ...See American Federation of Govt. Employees v. Defense General Supply Center, 423 F.Supp. 481 (ED Va.1976), aff'd per curiam, 573 F.2d 184 (CA4 1978). 1. The Court suggests that the Court of Appeals' order cannot reach the Union because the order as it affects the Union is not literally with......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT