## Facts

- Unions representing employees at multiple Department of Defense (DoD) components requested bargaining-unit employees’ home addresses to communicate about representational matters.
- The unions invoked 5 U.S.C. § 7114(b)(4), which requires agencies to furnish unions certain “necessary” and “reasonably available” data “not prohibited by law.”
- DoD refused, citing the Privacy Act of 1974, which generally prohibits disclosure of personal information from agency systems of records unless an exception applies.
- A key Privacy Act exception permits disclosure when it is “required under” the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA); thus, the dispute turned on whether FOIA compelled release of home addresses.
- The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) held DoD committed an unfair labor practice by refusing to provide the addresses and ordered disclosure, concluding disclosure was “necessary” and not barred by the Privacy Act because FOIA permitted or required it.
- DoD sought judicial review; the Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve whether disclosure could be compelled under § 7114(b)(4) given FOIA and the Privacy Act.

## Issues

1. Whether FOIA requires disclosure of federal employees’ home addresses to unions, or whether FOIA Exemption 6 protects those addresses from disclosure as a “clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
2. If FOIA does not require disclosure, whether the Privacy Act therefore prohibits disclosure, making the information “prohibited by law” under 5 U.S.C. § 7114(b)(4).
3. Whether courts should defer to the FLRA’s interpretations of FOIA and the Privacy Act when the FLRA uses those interpretations to compel disclosure under the federal labor statute.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the FLRA’s orders requiring DoD to disclose bargaining-unit employees’ home addresses to the unions.
- The Court held FOIA does not require release of the addresses because Exemption 6 applies after balancing employees’ privacy interests against FOIA’s recognized public interest.
- Because FOIA did not require disclosure, the Privacy Act’s FOIA-based exception did not apply, and the Privacy Act prohibited disclosure.
- The Court rejected deference to the FLRA’s interpretations of FOIA and the Privacy Act, reasoning that the FLRA’s labor-relations expertise does not extend to administering FOIA or the Privacy Act.

## Legal Principles

- Under FOIA Exemption 6, disclosure turns on whether releasing personal information would be a “clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,” assessed by balancing privacy interests against FOIA’s public interest in revealing government operations.
- The FOIA “public interest” in Exemption 6 balancing is limited to information that sheds light on governmental conduct; improved union communication with employees is not a FOIA-recognized public interest.
- The Privacy Act generally prohibits disclosure of personal information in systems of records unless an exception applies; the “required under FOIA” exception applies only when FOIA affirmatively mandates disclosure.
- Under 5 U.S.C. § 7114(b)(4), an agency’s duty to provide data to a union does not extend to information whose disclosure is barred by another statute.
- Courts need not defer to the FLRA’s views on statutes outside its delegated subject area, including FOIA and the Privacy Act.

## Conclusion

The Court held that federal employees’ home addresses could not be compelled for union use under § 7114(b)(4) because FOIA Exemption 6 did not require their disclosure and the Privacy Act therefore prohibited release, placing the information outside the union’s statutory entitlement and beyond the FLRA’s authority to order as an unfair labor practice remedy.


U.S. Dep’t of Def. v. Fed. Labor Rels. Auth., 510 U.S. 487 (1994)