Docstoc

Third Level Update 11-19-03

Document Sample
Third Level Update 11-19-03 Powered By Docstoc
					                                                3rd Level Review
                                               November 19, 2003
                                   Joe Formoso, Mike Verderamo, Jon Ramsden,
                                       Dave Guess, Jay Barrett, John Gainey

NC-SO-02-0622-ZTL-03-Abeyance. OE/OD. ASO has requested AAT-20 reclass the error. Awaiting response. Agency
cannot get one. NATCA will make inquiries through our Liaison. (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Hold – Jenkins has responded by re-submitting the packages to Ferrante – Ramsden will follow up with Mike
Hull.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0102-P31-03-Abeyance. OE/OD. ASO has requested AAT-20 reclass the error. Awaiting response. Agency
cannot get one. NATCA will make inquiries through our Liaison. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Hold – Jenkins has responded by re-submitting the packages to Ferrante – Ramsden will follow up with Mike
Hull.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0104-P31-03-Abeyance. OE/OD. ASO has requested AAT-20 reclass the error. Awaiting response. Agency
cannot get one. NATCA will make inquiries through our Liaison. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Hold – Jenkins has responded by re-submitting the packages to Ferrante – Ramsden will follow up with Mike
Hull.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                                    rd
NC-SO-03-0109-P31-03-Abeyance. Facility Cleanliness. Agreement reached at last 3 level to have a meeting between
AT, AF, NATCA, PASS to develop a plan to the facility cleaned. Last discussion with FACREP indicates facility
cleanliness still unsatisfactory. Both parties will do follow up with the facility to find out status and what still needs to be
done.     (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Money issue – AF operating with restoration money. Purely economics will have to wait
until they get a budget handoff. Jenkins will get with Manager on Action Plan to get Facility up to cleanliness Standards.
Osterdahl stated that it looks like this has drug on for a long time, and that he will take over follow up.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0111-P31-03-Agency Research. Medical Decertification. Employee hurt eye off duty. Personal Doctor
treated and gave medication. Flight surgeon restricted employee but did not disqualify. Wanted more info (acuity exam).
Under Collective Bargaining Agreement, flight surgeon pays. AT agrees. Flight surgeon refuses. Mack Alexander will
contact flight surgeon to determine why. Also, agreement reached: 8 hours SL needs to be restored. Still not done.
Mack will follow this up also.      (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Settled – The Agency shall restore 8 hours (Note: Flight surgeon documentation indicates employee did not
meet retention standard due to eye injury causing need for medication and doctor attention. In this case, any information
provided by the employee to establish that retention standards are met will be at the employees expense.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-246-ZME Decertification.               (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03--Neutral – Does a previous OE constitute a ―Documented Performance History‖ Agency position is that no
previous issues then a deal then another deal 5 days later the first deal is a documented performance deficiency to allow
decertification on second deal. Agency presented information on previous documented performance deficiencies. We
need to verify. If accurate, most likely will withdraw. If not, it will go to Neutral Evaluation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

03-247-ZME Decertification.               (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03-- Does a previous OE constitute a is ―Documented Performance History‖ Agency position is that no previous
issues then a deal then another deal 5 days later the first deal is a documented performance deficiency to allow
decertification on second deal. Agency presented information on previous documented performance deficiencies. We
need to verify. If accurate, most likely will withdraw. If not, it will go to Neutral Evaluation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-248-ZME Decertification.               (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03--Neutral - Does a previous OE constitute a ―Documented Performance History‖ Agency position is that no
previous issues then a deal then another deal 5 days later the first deal is a documented performance deficiency to allow
decertification on second deal. Agency presented information on previous documented performance deficiencies. We
need to verify. If accurate, most likely will withdraw. If not, it will go to Neutral Evaluation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------

NC-SO-03-273-A80 John Abdul-Malik. Issue: OS met, discussed, and issued, suspension letter (03-277-A80) to BUE,
did this constitute a formal meeting? Synopsis: OS James approached Mr. Malik and advised that OS McCollum wanted
to meet with Malik in sups office. Malik met with OS in sups office and OS read the suspension letter and discussed it with
Malik. Formal meeting, Union not offered to attend. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03—It is questionable as to whether there was more than an exchange or existing information as opposed to a
discussion on the circumstances. No Further Action.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------

NC-SO-03-0287-A80-03-Agency Research. Issue: Consistency of training for MCN/CSG controllers. We provided a
spreadsheet showing inadequate amounts of training. Employees are not being afforded the opportunity to be successful
as a result of management exercising their rights to use employees for staffing. Management agreed to go back to the
facility and review training times for consistency. The agreed to include the Union in these discussions. (Advocate: Jay
Barrett)

11/19/03--Union Research – Mgt position is that all employees who were not successful all got the same type of training,
albeit very minimal. They believe there is no disparate treatment because all employees were treated the same. We will
look at new data provided and either withdraw or schedule for next neutral evaluation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NC-SO-03-0290-A80-03-Agency Research. Action Plan for Performance Management. Big issue region wide about
OE/D reduction guidance put out by Rick Day. Bottom line—it is internal agency guidance. Most facilities will not
generate grievance activity. In this case, there was one specific change that would have required negotiations. The
manager imposed, albeit unwritten, a new currency requirement. All employees have to work at least 24 hours per month
in the TRACON or undergo a skill check. While this may be a management right, it is a change and would require I&I
bargaining. Employees have already been subjected to this policy. Rick Day wants to go back to the facility to verify that
they implemented a change to currency requirements. (Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Union Research – Management talked to ATM – ATM position was that this had been going on for years.
Union knew about it. Management position is that there is no new requirement to give a skill check based solely on the
numbers of hours worked in the TRACON the previous month, but the number of hours is used only as a tool to determine
possible proficiency. FACREP needs to verify if all employees with less than 24 hours in the TRACON are getting skill
checks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0297-A80-03-Agency Research. EEO investigation—Union Representation. Employees were denied Union
representation and the Union was not afforded the opportunity to be represented. Union position is that this was a formal
meeting. (Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Neutral or Elevate – Article 56 / 6 says an employee may have a union rep upon request. Our position is that
this is a formal/grievance meeting, and as such we are entitled to be represented regardless of the wishes of the
                                                                                           th
employee. This falls in line with the decision by the DC Circuit Court. Agency position – 9 circuit court decision says
EEO complaint is not a grievance.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------

03-302-A80 Vince Polk. Issue: change in working conditions. Synopsis: FAA changed cleaning contractors, in doing so
the BU @ A80 no longer receives Charmin toilet paper and the paper towels are inferior. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Hold – Paper towels – manager has said they would go to a higher grade when the existing supply is
exhausted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------

03-303-A80 Vince Polk. Issue: Failure of the Agency to provide A7 notice to Union concerning weather modification to
ASR-8. Synopsis: On 8/27/03 memo placed in R&I binder concerning weather mod to ASR-8 stating that this modification
is ongoing. 2 days later 8/29/03 FAA gave NATCA memo stating that modifications completed. Check with A48
workgroup were negotiations conducted at national level. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Management position – they only were required the 2 levels they previously had and were
not required to use the enhanced levels until they were trained. They are going to find out if there was an option of not
using wx until trained .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------

03-304-A80 Dan Ellenberger. Issue: A38 S8 violation (management cancelled scheduled OT with less than seven days
notice). Synopsis: Management agrees that a violation of A38 S8 occurred, however FAA wants to follow the overtime
bypass MOU and offer 8 hours OT on day and shift of Dan's choosing as well as not charging this OT on the OT list. Offer
was contingent on acceptance within 2 weeks. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Settled – Agency shall compensate Mr. Ellenberger with 8 hours OT within 60 days of signing this agreement
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------

03-305-A80 Vince Polk. Issue: A7 notice, concerning new checklist for opening/closing runways. Synopsis: On 8/28/03
FAA notified NATCA of Notice to be placed in R&I binder, effective next day (08/29/03),concerning new checklist for
opening/closing runways. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03—FACREP ultimately got changes he wanted, therefore the Team felt there would be no benefit in pursuing this
issue. No Further Action Taken

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------

NC-SO-03-0315-ZTL-03-Abeyance. O/D. ASO has requested AAT-20 reclass the error. Awaiting response. Agency
cannot get one. NATCA will make inquiries through our Liaison. (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Hold – Jenkins has responded by re-submitted the packages to Ferrante – Ramsden will follow up with Mike
Hull.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --

NC-SO-03-0318-ZTL-03-Abeyance. O/E. ASO has requested AAT-20 reclass the error. Awaiting response. Agency
cannot get one. NATCA will make inquiries through our Liaison. (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Hold – Jenkins has responded by re-submitting the packages to Ferraute – Ramsden will follow up with Mike
Hull.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0324-ZTL-03-Agency Research. Issue: Sunday Pay and Mid shift start times and forced earning/using of
credit hours. Employees scheduled for a shift that does not afford 8 hours of work on a Sunday every week. T&A clerk
changing T&A info showing employees earning/using CH’s that they did not sign for. Affects Areas 1 and 4. Affects Sat
night/Sun morning mid. Since Sep 1998- Oct 2002. Approx $11K-$13K in question.           (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Union Research – Agency decided they are in violation, but need to find out how to compensate and how much.
Also in dispute is period for remedy. Agency needs to see if they can amend the T&A’s to go back 20 days. We will
provide Jenkins with an information request for T & A data.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0348-CLT-03-Abeyance. Fire alarm system upgrade. Contract has been let. Work begins in Nov. Approx 4
months to complete. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Hold in Abeyance-

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-355-CLT-03 Nepotism. No article 7 negotiations. Section 11.                                (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Elevate -

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NC-SO-03-356-CLT-03 OPERATIONAL ERROR – Section 11. ASH5702 departed 18L, assigned East Departure but
called West Departure. West was expecting ASH5757 to depart 18R. ASH5702 checked in with West, West issued,
―ASH5757 turn right heading 250.‖ ASH5702 read back, ―250 5702.‖ ASH5702 turned in front of ASH5757 departing 18R.
Neither aircraft was tagged. ASH5702 was charged a pilot deviation. Due to the proximity of the runway, there was no
time to prevent the error from occurring if the controller had realized that the wrong aircraft had taken the control
instruction.    (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--We haven’t developed a position. Belmont will provide transcript with times. If Controller caught ReadBack
error immediately and took immediate action – Our position is the error was procedural (and related to the waiver the
facility operates under) and not Controllers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------

NC-SO-03-357-CLT-03 AF manager agreed to buy a new refrigerator with money from the 02 budget. The refrigerator
still has not been purchased. AF still intends to buy the refer when money is available. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Hold in Abeyance – Agency still intends to purchase refrigerator when the funds become available. Agency
working under restriction to only spend money for restoration purposes (until the CR ends and we get a budget) Notice
our expectation is that it is purchased when budget is done.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-358-CLT-03- Shift Swaps. Can employees trade shifts after their respective shifts start? Article 32, section 5.
Change did not result in OT, or violate the basic work week. Employees were attempting to trade day shifts so they can
trade midshifts that night. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Emp 1 has 630 comes in @615a for credit hours. Emp 2 has 715 comes in at 630a for
credit hours. 630 has mid-wants to give it to the 715 guy. So 715 guy can work mid. Mgt said no because shifts had
already started. Ops Request was met. No OT used.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-359-CLT-03 Does credit hours earned constitute a ―regularly assigned shift‖ as stated in Article 80, section 5?
BUM has an error on his Friday (Friday). BUM is scheduled to work a CH midshift on his second RDO (Sunday). Facility
                                                                                  nd
cancels his CHE because his status is undetermined and replaces him with OT. (2 OE in 2 years requires ATD approval
prior to return to duty). Employee had taken another employee’s ―regularly scheduled shift.‖ (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Neutral – Management had not started the remedial training plan. Union position is that they had no authority
to prevent the employee from working for the credit hours earned. We want 8 AL restored, unless in a use/lose status. If
so, then restore 8 CH. Agreed statement of case for arbitrator: Does committing to work for Credit hours make it a
regular assigned shift?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------
NC-SO-03-360/362-CLT-03 Article 32, section 5 – Does a requested shift change have to be to a published shift to be
approved? CLT NATCA believes that nothing precludes management from assigning any shift. Change would have
enhanced the operation. This debate stems from a dispute over the 8-4 shift that was just taken out of the local orders,
and management wants it put back in. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – (Suggested language for settlement agreement: Management may, at its discretion and at
the request of an employee approve a shift other than those that currently exist as part of the BAWS or local orders.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NC-SO-03-361-CLT-03 Shift Swaps. Can employees trade shifts after their respective shifts start? Article 32, section 5.
Change did not result in OT, or violate the basic work week. Employees were attempting to trade day shifts so they can
trade midshifts that night. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Emp 1 has 630 comes in @615a for credit hours. Emp 2 has 715 comes in at 630a for
credit hours. 630 has mid-wants to give it to the 715 guy. So 715 guy can work mid. Mgt said no because shifts had
already started. Ops Request was met. No OT used.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-363-CLT-03 Regional grievance on the implementation of Oversight Initiative.

11/19/03--Withdrawn – The initiative did not precipitate any changes in working conditions. Unanimous – strictly internal
management guidance. Only if they make un-negotiated changes would any grievance be valid.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-364-CLT-03 Employee counseled for performance of CIC duties. He took an operational position while signed
on CIC. Management maintains that numerous personnel were available (8) and thunderstorms were in the area.

11/19/03--Agency Research – Union position: Management has the right to disagree with what an employee does in the
performance of his/her duties. The method by which they do this is performance management. While there may be a
difference of opinion there is no violation of any provisions of 7210.3 2-6-2. We want the record of conversation
invalidated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-366-CLT-03 Nepotism. Section 8. Actual harm – employee denied CIC.

11/19/03--Elevate -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-0372-MIA-03-Agency Research. OWCP issue—Leave Buy Back. Timeliness of processing leave by back
paperwork. Agency has no way to change employees tax burden ($346.90). There is no known time requirement for
processing of paperwork. Agency says a letter was issued to the employee explaining the process of getting money back
on subsequent year tax return. They are trying to track down a copy. We do not have a copy in the grievance package.
(Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03—Abeyance. Employee has paid the agency his portion of the leave buy back and gotten the guidance on how
to be reimbursed in the filing of his 2003 taxes. Will hold until tax specialist verifies this will happen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(NC) SO-03-0375-MIA-03 Issue: Late certification of CIC resulting in loss of premium pay and inequitable distribution of
CIC duties.     Article 18 section 4 states that, ―an employee shall have been …area rated/certified for at least 6 months
and shall be operationally current. However the 7210 states that personnel that have been CIC at a previous facility are
not subject to the 6 months. Almost all employees at MIA have been CIC at a prior facility. A small group of employees
that arrived at MIA at approximately the same time were CIC certified in a timely manner. ATCS Anderson has no record
of inadequate or substandard performance and therefore there is no justification for not certifying him.        Requested
Remedy: Average amount of CIC pay from his team from 4/15/02 till 3/20/03. Approximately 90 hrs . (Advocate: Jay
Barrett)
11/19/03—All employees at MIA are CIC qualified as a condition of employment. Employees do not have an entitlement
to be CIC qualified. Withdrawn

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1138-BNA-03- w/ 2165-BNA – Security Cameras and Card Readers. This is the subject matter grievance that
was being negotiated. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03—This is a situation where the agency says there was no agreement. Our position is that there was. As such,
this is a case of a repudiated agreement. Facility needs to file a ULP. The original grievance was filed on May 30, 2003
therefore the ULP needs to be filed by November 30, 2003

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1139-BNA-03- Union Research. New package.               Special Treatment. Computer Access. (Advocate: Bart
Countess) Special Treatment: Computer Access. BUM’s have been told they cannot hook-up personal computers to FAA
phone lines. The Automation Specialist is being allowed to keep her personal computer hooked up to FAA lines at her
desk and is used exclusively for personal use. (NOTE: This female staff specialist is Sherry’s ―golden girl‖ and is allowed
to do things that no else is allowed to do. She is the same one at the center of 1140-BNA). (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research – Agency position is that this was a one time event that lasted about 2 weeks. The employees
work computer was out of service and she voluntarily asked to use her personal laptop computer while it was being
repaired. She no longer uses her laptop at work, and does not have it there any longer. Find out from Facility Rep that it
is still going on, on a routine basis.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1140-BNA-03- Special Treatment: Excused Absence. Over the last several years, numerous controllers have
asked for official time to attend funerals, including for family members. Each request has been denied. Both Bob Snook
and Kelly Fleming have direct and specific experience with these requests. Sherry granted official time – no annual leave
charged – to the Automation Specialist to attend the funeral of a family member. When the union challenged the ATM on
this issue, she stated that if they pushed it she would be forced to rescind the policy. Apparently, she did issue a
memorandum that is supposed to be in the package in Atlanta. (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research – Manager has unknown (at least to all employees) policy of giving excused absence to staff
specialist and not to BUE. Management says there is no policy. Our position is that there is a policy as is evidenced by a
letter rescinding said policy. FACREP needs to provide a copy of letter rescinding policy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1144-ZSU-03-Union Research. Tuition for San Juan Dependents. Agency says bill was paid--$613,380.00 to
the DOD on Sept. 30, 2003 for the 2003-2004 school year. We need to verify this with the FACREP. If so, No further
action required.  (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Withdrawn

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1152-P31-03-Agency Research. O/E. 03 Letter of reprimand for not reporting an OE. Agency position is the
employee knew, or should have known he had a loss of separation. We withdrew the grievance on the O/E at the October
 rd
3 level. Staffing was short, drug testers showed up and management allowed the testing to drag on, causing the member
to be forced to work without help. He was extremely busy! We removed the O/E grievance, now the FAA needs to do the
right thing and remove this action. Not sure if the right number is 2327 or 2377 (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Agency wants to validate – How many A/C was he working, wants to listen to voice tape
and if Will (ATM) said the Region is making him give the Letter of Reprimand.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

 (NC) SO-02-1378-A80-03       Issue: LOR for disruptive and inappropriate behavior.   This is David Cookfair, one of
the guys we used as an example to get Malik’s suspension reduced. As of 11/9/03 Vinnie advises that A80 management
has not put the employees on notice. There are separate specifications for creating a disturbance in the control room.
Requested remedy: LOR and all associated records be removed from employee’s personnel folder.          (Advocate: Jay
Barrett)

11/19/03--Withdrawn

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

03-1390-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 38, Section 9 by failing to offer two
hours overtime to an employee who flexed in before his shift? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Settled – Agency shall Compensate the employee with 1.5 hours OT within 60 days of the agreement.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------

03-1463-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 7 by failing to bargain over a new policy
of limiting the number of controllers who could be on break at the same time? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn –Union claims there is a local agreement stating the number of people required to be in the control
room. Management denies this. We cannot prove our position. Without proof of an existing agreement, this is simply an
assignment of work issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-1465-ZJX No package. Local requests that we withdraw this grievance at the table.                                     (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn at Local’s request.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

02-1480-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 24, Section 9 by denying an employee’s
request to turn in annual leave for a particular shift? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn – Guidelines were 14/14 – actual 14/13 ops requirements indicates assignment to evening shift was
Ok.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1481-ZJX-03 Denial of shift change.                          (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn at request of the Local.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-1482-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Does the Agency violate national MOU #499 by requiring employees
to display parking decals that identify them as FAA employees? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03—Elevate.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

03-1566-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency erroneously charge two employees with an operational
error? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn –Controller saw the confliction and thought it would work. Union cannot prove that the lack of
conflict alert caused the operational error.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

03-1569-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 38, Section 9 by failing to offer two
hours overtime to an employee held over past the end of her shift? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

Issue: Employee held over 2 min past end of her shift. SISO data does not show her working (she forgot to sign on).
Agency position is that she was not held over, she just signed off after the end of her shift.

11/19/03--Union Research – We are going to find out if she actually got paid 2 min OT if so we must decide if we will go
forward.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-1577-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 18, Section 6 by assigning a non-
qualified employee CIC duties? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

No sup on duty (sl). CIC getting ready to go home. Tells ops manager there is no one CIC qualified. Contention is that
the ops manager told the CIC to just put someone in charge, she doesn’t care if they are qualified or not.

11/19/03--No Further Action – We have no evidence supporting the contention that the ops manager gave this direction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-1677-ZJX Grievant: NATCA Local ZJX Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 10 when it issued a Letter of Reprimand
to an employee for failing to record a position relief briefing? (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--No Further Action – Agency posses previous TTD (3) (4/29/03) about deficiency in Position Release Briefing.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-1678-ZJX-03                  (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Withdrawn per Local VP.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
1735-1754 ZJX OT on Sunday Employees worked OT on Sunday and did not get Sunday and Overtime pay. This is a
national issue. (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Elevate -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1774-ZJX OE (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Agency Research - Employee was distracted by URET during the immunity period. Union position is that
claiming distraction by URET gives immunity. The MOU says there will be no local interpretations, so management does
not have the right to claim the MOU doesn’t apply because their interpretation is the distraction was not from URET.
Agency want to verify with one of their negotiating team members on the intent of this provision of the MOU. This is a sup
from BUF who was the lead for the agency.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1775-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1776-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1777-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1778-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1779-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1780-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1781-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1782-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1783-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1784-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research -

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

1785-ZJX Letter of Admonishment                        (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Union Research –

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2165-BNA-03-Agency Research. Good faith bargaining. Negotiations were conducted over local security
order. Agreement was reached. Manager asked for a ―clean‖ copy to sign. After discussion with region, she refused to
sign. Agency position is no agreement was reached—it wasn’t signed. Union position is that agreement was reached,
printing and signing was just logistics. Agency did not bargain in good faith. Agency wants to look into what, if any,
agreement was actually reached at the table. (Also, third step, division manager review, has not been completed yet.)
(Advocate: Bart Countess) (see 1138)

11/19/03--Facility to file ULP – She did sit down and negotiate where she had authority. Union specifically asked and she
said she did.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2260-SJU-03-Agency Research. Parking lot issues at SJU. Rick day wants to have an opportunity to look
into it and possibly make direct contact with the airport authority to resolve the issue. (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Rick Day wrote a letter to PR Port Authority . Agency will provide us a copy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
03-2261-SJU Grievant: NATCA Local SJU Issue: Did the Agency violate Article 43, Section 4 by extending an
individual’s temporary promotion to supervisor beyond 120 days? (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Withdrawn in August

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

03-2262-SJU Grievant: NATCA Local SJU Issue: Did the Agency violate a local MOU by failing to brief BUEs on the
contents of the MOU? (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Withdrawn in August

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2263-PDK-03-Agency Research. Issue is changing shifts within 7 days. Agency wants to do a little more
research before it gives its answer and regional position. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03--Elevate – Agency position that the Facility Manager being told that he cannot use OT suffices under Art 32 for
the determination that no OT will be used

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2268-PDK-03-Agency Research. Issue is changing shifts within 7 days. Agency wants to do a little more
research before it gives its answer and regional position. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03-- Elevate – Agency position that the Facility Manager being told that he cannot use OT suffices under Art 32 for
the determination that no OT will be used

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2269-PDK-03-Agency Research. Issue is changing shifts within 7 days. Agency wants to do a little more
research before it gives its answer and regional position. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03-- Elevate – Agency position that the Facility Manager being told that he cannot use OT suffices under Art 32 for
the determination that no OT will be used

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2270-PDK-03-Agency Research. A Issue is changing shifts within 7 days. Agency wants to do a little more
research before it gives its answer and regional position. (Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03-- Elevate – Agency position that the Facility Manager being told that he cannot use OT suffices under Art 32 for
the determination that no OT will be used

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2271-PDK-03- Agency Research. Issue is changing shifts within 7 days. Agency wants to do a little more
research before it gives its answer and regional position. (Advocate: John Gainey)
11/19/03--Elevated – Agency position that the Facility Manager being told that he cannot use OT suffices under Art 32 for
the determination that no OT will be used

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------

NC-SO-03-2279-ZTL-03- Agency Research. Pay Status.                               (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Agency Research – Was he on OWCP when he got reinstated or was he on Disability Retirement. OWCP says
he was on OWCP until Apr 99 Agency agrees that if he was on OWCP when reinstate his pay would be set different than
if he was on Retirement. We provided Documentation showing he was on OWCP. Agency going to verify and if genuine
will correct pay. Tom Boro to follow up.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2290-ZTL Comp Time                (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03—Withdrawn at FACREP request

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2293-ZTL FMLA              (Advocate: Dave Guess)

11/19/03--Agency/ Union Research – agrees that it is not FMLA Agency position is that the employee has to establish that
there is a serious Health Condition before they are required to approve. Need more info on what can be required under
CBA vs FMLA.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2294-ZTL Performance Deficiencies                    (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03--Returned to Local Level

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2296-ZTL Issue: Did the Agency violate a local order in Area 4 which requires team training at least once a month at ZTL.
(Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03--Union Research – No proof provided in package. Jon will follow up with ZTL to determine if proof exists of the
violation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2303-MEM-03-Agency/Union Research. No package. Question as to whether it was really a formal meeting.
(Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

11/19/03--No Further Action. FACREP says the meeting did occur but no policy was discussed nor wan any policy set. It
was just an informal conversation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------
(NC) SO-03-2313-GPT-03        Issue: Agency Failed to pay employee pay differential while on military duty. According
to OPM guidance employees on military leave are entitled to differentials except for Sunday pay. The grievance was
Sustained at the local level. Requested remedy: Back Pay IAW 5596 (Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Union/Agency Research – Management says correction to T & A’s have been done

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(NC) SO-03-2314-GPT-03           Issue: Agency Failed to pay employee pay differential while on military duty. According
to OPM guidance employees on military leave are entitled to differentials except for Sunday pay. There is some
discrepancy as to timeliness on this grievance. Requested remedy: Back Pay IAW 5596 (Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Union/Agency Research – We need to find our if correction to T & A’s have been done, and if not, make a
determination based on the agency claim of not being timely. Agency will talk to payroll about using a formula versus
doing research to figure how to make employees whole.

(------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------

(NC) SO-03-2315-GPT-03             Issue: Agency was untimely in giving the employee a form for extended military duty in
a timely manner. The facrep is trying to make the manager and his staff look bad. I can find no time requirements on
when this form should be presented to the employee. Requested remedy: 12 credit hours for the BUE (Advocate: Jay
Barrett)

11/19/03--Withdrawn – per FACREP request.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

(NC) SO-03-2316-GPT-03           Issue: Employee called at home without being offered union representation. The supe
was trying to determine who approved the OT the grievant worked the day before. This does not fall under a weingarten
meeting. It may be an article 6 section 3 violation. However, Meetings with employees to gather information regarding
agency operations, whether conducted in a group or individually, do not constitute formal discussions. Defense Logistics
Agency, Tracy, 48 FLRA 744, 93 FLRR 1-1260 ; IRS, 14 FLRA 698, 84 FLRR 1-1468. Requested remedy: 8 hrs OT.
(Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Neutral –CIC approved 2 hours OT when the employee went over 8 hours on a physical. Supervisor call
grievant at home - RDO- to find out ―who approved OT‖ – 8 hours OT. Union position is that calling employee at home
puts her in a duty status, and since it was an RDO, she is entitled to 8 hours OT.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------

(NC) SO-03-2317-GPT-03                     Issue: Employee called at home without being offered union representation. See 2316.
(Advocate: Jay Barrett)

11/19/03--Neutral – Requested remedy: 2 hrs OT. Same situation from above, except this was a call to the person who
was CIC. This was a duty day, so the Union position is she was put back into a duty status and entitled to 2 hours OT.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------

(NC) SO-03-2318-GPT-03            Issue: Agency failed to re-certify employee in a timely manner thereby resulting in a loss
of ability to earn holiday pay. The supe was a bit lackadaisical in re-certifying the grievant. The employee would have
been eligible if the supe had given a ride when the grievant said she was ready. Requested remedy: 9 hrs holiday pay, 5
hrs night diff. (Advocate: Jay Barrett)
                                                              rd
11/19/03—Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2327-CLT Roster of Overtime Distribution Not sure if the right number is 2327 or 2377 (Advocate: Bart Countess)

11/19/03--Withdrawn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------

2377-CLT Viewing of overtime Roster                   Not sure if the right number is 2327 or 2377 – WITHDRAW (Advocate: Bart
Countess)

11/19/03--Withdraw

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2379-ZMA Issue: Did the Agency properly suspend a BUE for failure to report an OE. Employee received a 3 day
suspension for failure to report an OE. Employee claims he believed he maintained separation using visual separation
rules. Mgt says sep was lost prior to visual separation being applied. Management says he ―knew, or should have
known― that separation did not exist . (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2381-LEX-03-Agency/Union Research. Issue: Did management implement a change in working conditions
without negotiation. No package. Operational Oversight Initiatives. Change to the duties of Radar Data without
negotiations (I&I). Change created a pre/post brief period. (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2408-CVG O/E Projection Separation Loss of separation between 2 aircraft on headings (090 and 270), except that
second aircraft did not take assigned heading (270. He flew approx 215). He turned into path of the other aircraft.
Additionally, there was vertical, until the controller descended aircraft number 2 after turning him 270. Key question is
―would separation have been lost even if the second aircraft had flown the 270 heading.‖ If so, the team agrees that it
was a controller error for not ensuring separation. If not, then we fight to remove the error since it was solely the result of
pilot action. (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                                                                 nd
NC-SO-03-2432-PDK-03- Issue: Harassing CIC thru "performance discussions" Synopsis: OS Hernandez, 2                                                   guessing
CIC actions. Performance counseling based on technique/opinion.  (Advocate: John Gainey)

We cannot make a determination about the disposition of this grievance until data is provided. Hold until the grievance or
ULP is disposed of
                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---

NC-SO-03-2433-PDK-03- Issue: A7 notification, Synopsis: PDK ATM/ASO-500 implementation of CiC staffed as
separate posn from July 16 – July 29. MGT views this as an assignment of work under Artilce 5. No I & I. Management
has right to make this assignment of work but it is a change and requires notice & I & I (Advocate: John Gainey)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2434-PDK-03- Issue: A53 , Synopsis: Freon leaking for several says, AF advised on 7/26 no response, AF
again advised of leak no response, On 7/28/03 the fire alarm sounded & twr evacuated due to smoke/poisonous Freon
gas emissions. 1 BUE transported by ambulance due to vomiting. Looking to restore 1.5 SL. (Advocate: John Gainey)

CA-1 was filed – entitled to excused absence for remainder of day

                                                               rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2435-PDK-03-Union Research. New Package. Night Diff/Holiday pay for military duty. Agency having a
problem in not getting a definitive position between 2 different lines of business. AT says yes, HR says no. Requests
NATCA to go to the national level with issue.      (Advocate: John Gainey)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2436-PDK-03- Issue: A18 CIC and A33 2hrs on posn Synopsis: BUE approaching 2 hrs TOP, CIC calls BUEs
on break to return to provide relief, OS Hernandez who is performing skills checks orders CIC to change plans and re-
assign BUE to another posn . Sup in tower, not signed on in charge, but telling CIC’s what to do.   (Advocate: John
Gainey)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2437-LEX Comp/Credit time usage Issue: Did management mistakenly charge comp time to an employee requesting to
use credit hours. (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2443-MEM Release policy Issue: Did management violate Article 7 by refusing to negotiate with the Union over the
Union’s request to create a facility release policy (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------

2444-MEM Art 7 Issue: Did management violate Article 7 by failing to negotiate a change in the requirement to log facility
delays. Management is requiring BUE’s to log all Taxi times regardless of delay status. (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2465-LEX NATCA Bulletin Board Issue: Is the Agency required to provide a glassed in bulletin board to the Union.
(Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2467-PDK-03- Issue: A18 CIC Synopsis: CIC in TWR, OS Hernandez (not signed on) issues orders for CIC
on positions rotation and breaks. Issiung specific vs general plan for CIC Sup in tower, not signed on in charge, but telling
CIC’s what to do.      (Advocate: John Gainey)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2468-PDK-03- Issue: A7 notification Synopsis: While acting on behalf of absent ATM OS Hernandez creates
and issues a new ―Flight Track Form‖ for CIC to complete whenever outside inquiries are made regarding flts in/out of
PDK. New form (FD Tracking form) implemented by Sup without negotiations with Union.       (Advocate: John Gainey)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2470-SJU-03-Agency Research. Art 7. Changes to 7210.3                                      (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Returned to local level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2471-SJU-03-Agency Research. Refresher Training on Lifeguard Flights. Agency position: Document put
out was refresher training on lifeguard flights. Union position is that this information does not exist anywhere else, it is not
refresher training, but new direction stating new requirements. Agency want to verify whether it already exists or not.
(Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03-- Returned to local level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2474-SJU-03-Union Research. Use of FAA office space. Need to determine who controls the building, FAA
or Port Authority. (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)
11/19/03--Returned to Local Level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------

NC-SO-03-2475-SJU-03-Union Research. Skill enhancement training.                                    (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03-- Returned to Local Level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

NC-SO-03-2476-SJU-03-Union Research. Denial of FACREP time.                                     (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--Returned to Local Level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2480-SJU Disruptive behavior by ATM                     (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03-- Returned to Local Level at SJU visit by Leadership Team and coordinated with 540 (Cochran).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------

2481-ZMA Breath Alcohol Test Issue: Did the Agency violate the alcohol testing policy by failing to inform an employee
not to smoke or chew gum between the initial test and the confirmation test. (Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2482-ZMA Area 1 Vision Statement Issue: Is the Agency required to re-assign a management official who has a record
of violating law, rule, policy, contract and common sense to a position with no contact to the bargaining unit. (Advocate:
Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2484-PDK Preferential Shifts Agency is giving preferential shift assignments based on religious accommodations. Mgt
must assign shifts IAW A32 and then make accommodations under A26/S5. BUT, this is not a religious issue, it is an
education issue, and accommodations under A32/S5 cannot affect others unless they agree. Union position is that no
matter what the issue is (religious or education) management cannot make the accommodations they are making.
(Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03—Agency Research. Issue presented because of the ongoing harm to all other employees. Agency is going to
investigate whether the issue is religious or education.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2487-GPT-03 Formal meeting with BUM without union notification or representation. Employee did not report to the sup
upon arrival for work. Employee was called to the sup’s office and ordered to always report to him upon arrival for work.
No dialog took place, very brief. There is not a local policy on what an employee is to do upon arrival. It would be nice to
get something that says employees cannot violate a rule unless a rule exists. The BUM has transferred to MEM.
(Advocate: John Gainey)

11/19/03—No further action necessary. Issue has been resolved.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2509-DAB Nepotism-denied shift swap                     (Advocate: Mike Verderamo)

11/19/03--elevate

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2510-MEM Training Failure Issue: Did the Agency improperly deny a request by a BUE training failure to transfer to ELP.
(Advocate: Jon Ramsden)

                                                              rd
11/19/03-- Not discussed. Carry over to next 3 level

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:4
posted:9/27/2011
language:English
pages:19