Health Care Financing Administration and AFGE Local 1923 (Authority decision, October 31, 1985)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority on exceptions to an arbitration award. Judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1) generally does not extend to an Authority order involving an arbitration award unless the order involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116.

Plain-English summary

A safety specialist traveled outside duty hours to visit three regional offices and received an arbitration award of 23 hours of overtime. The Health Care Financing Administration challenged the award. The Authority found that the visits and travel had been scheduled by the employee with the agency's approval. Because the travel was tied to events that could be scheduled or controlled administratively, the time did not qualify as compensable hours under the applicable overtime statute. The Authority set aside the award.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Travel overtime rule under 5 U.S.C. § 5542(b)(2).
• Outcome: Award of 23 overtime hours set aside.
• Key point: Travel outside duty hours was not compensable when the visits could be scheduled or controlled administratively.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v20 p583 ]

20:0583(70)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

20 FLRA No. 70

HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION
Activity

and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1923
Union

Case No. 0-AR-1001

DECISION

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Seymour Strongin filed by the Activity under section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.

The dispute before the Arbitrator concerned the grievant's claim for 23 hours of overtime pay for the time she travelled during non-duty hours in connection with visits to three regional offices of the Activity. The grievant, a safety specialist required to make such visits, prepared her own travel schedule after having been informed by her supervisor that she might have to travel on non-duty time because of airline schedules and the necessity that the regional visits be conducted during duty hours. The schedule, which involved "travel during non-duty time" was reviewed and approved by the Activity. The Arbitrator rejected the Activity's argument that the grievant's non-duty travel time was not compensable under 5 U.S.C. 5542(b)(2). The Arbitrator found that the Activity had failed to make the maximum practicable effort to schedule the grievant's travel to occur during work hours as required by the parties' collective bargaining agreement. The Arbitrator further found that the grievant was required to travel during non-duty hours in violation of the parties' agreement and that such travel time constituted hours of employment for which the grievant was entitled to receive overtime pay. Accordingly, the Arbitrator sustained the grievance and awarded the grievant 23 hours of overtime compensation.

In its exceptions, the Activity contends, among other things, that the Arbitrator's award is contrary to 5 U.S.C. 5542(b)(2). The Authority agrees.

It is well-established that under 5 U.S.C. 5542(b)(2)(B)(iv), time spent in a travel status is not compensable as hours of employment unless the event which necessitated the travel is one which could not be scheduled or controlled administratively. E.g., United States Department of Labor and National Council of Field Labor Locals, American Federation of Government Employees, 10 FLRA 491(1982); U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Correctional Institution, Danbury, Connecticut and American Federation of Government Employees, Council of Prison Locals, Local 1661, 16 FLRA No. 112 (1984). In the terms of this case, the grievant's travel to and from the three regional offices did not result from an event that could not be scheduled or controlled administratively. Rather, the visits were scheduled and controlled by the grievant with the concurrence of the Activity. Consequently, contrary to the Arbitrator's determination, the grievant's travel time did not constitute hours of employment under 5 U.S.C. 5542(b)(2) for which compensation could be granted. Therefore, the Arbitrator's award of 23 hours of overtime pay is contrary to 5 U.S.C. 5542(b)(2).

Accordingly, the award is hereby set aside.

Issued, Washington, D.C., October 31, 1985
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY