Social Security Administration and AFGE Local 3239 (Authority decision, February 5, 1986)

FLRA interlocutory decision. The Authority dismisses premature exceptions to an interim arbitration award while the arbitrator retains the remedy issue. The underlying arbitration remains open. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1), orders involving arbitral awards are generally excluded from judicial review unless they involve an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision does not state that it involves one.

Plain-English summary

An arbitrator found that the Social Security Administration's Detroit Teleservice Center violated its agreement when it ended free parking for some employees after a move. He deferred the remedy so the parties could explore options. The agency filed exceptions and sought a stay before the arbitrator completed the case. The Authority dismissed both as premature because the award had not resolved the entire dispute. The agency could renew its arguments after a final arbitration award.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Review of arbitration exceptions under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a) and interlocutory appeals under 5 C.F.R. § 2429.11.
• Outcome: Exceptions and stay request dismissed without prejudice as interlocutory.
• Key point: An arbitration ruling on liability remains interim when the remedy is still unresolved.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v21 p22 ]

21:0022(3)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

21 FLRA No. 3

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Agency

and

LOCAL 3239, AMERICAN FEDERATION
OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
Union

Case No. 0-AR-1061

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

This case is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Erwin B. Ellmann filed by the Agency pursuant to section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and section 2425.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. The Agency has also filed a request for a stay of the award under part 2429 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. For the reasons stated below, it has been determined that the exceptions and the request for a stay must be dismissed as interlocutory.

According to the Arbitrator, the parties agreed that the issue to be resolved by him was whether the Detroit Teleservice Center (the Activity) violated the parties' collective bargaining agreement by eliminating free-of-charge parking for some employees when the Activity moved to a new location; and, if so, what should the appropriate remedy be? In the instant award the Arbitrator essentially found that the Activity had violated the parties' agreement. However, the Arbitrator expressly deferred any award as to an appropriate remedy until the parties had an opportunity to explore various possibilities. In that latter regard, the Arbitrator only directed the parties to consider those possibilities and to notify him of the results within a set period of time. The Arbitrator further advised the parties that if they reached agreement lie would, if the parties so desired, review their agreement with the object of confirming it in his award; and if they did not reach an agreement, they should be prepared to submit additional evidence and argument at a further hearing on this matter.

Section 2429.11 of the Authority' s Rules and Regulations provides: "The Authority and the General Counsel ordinarily will not consider interlocutory appeals." That is, the Authority ordinarily will not consider an appeal until a final decision has been rendered on the entire proceeding.

In this case, it is clear that the Arbitrator has not rendered a final award on the entire dispute before him. Rather, as indicated above, the Arbitrator issued an interim award deciding the first part of the issue presented, i.e., whether the Activity violated the parties' collective bargaining agreement, and expressly deferred final disposition as to the remedy in the dispute. Thus, the Agency's exceptions are considered interlocutory and the facts and circumstances are not such as to warrant review of the exceptions at this time.

Accordingly, since the Agency' s exceptions are interlocutory and Authority review is not warranted under the circumstances, the exceptions and the request for a stay are hereby dismissed. However, the dismissal is without prejudice to the renewal of any of the Agency' s contentions in exceptions duly filed with the Authority after a final award is rendered by the Arbitrator.

For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C. February 5, 1986
(s)---
Harold D. Kessler
Director of Case Management