Social Security Administration, Mid-America Program Service Center and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1336 (Authority decision, February 6, 1987)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies reconsideration of its order rejecting exceptions to an arbitration award. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1), an order involving an arbitral award is generally excluded from judicial review unless it involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision does not decide an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

AFGE Local 1336 asked the Authority to reconsider its earlier rejection of exceptions to an arbitration award involving the Social Security Administration's Mid-America Program Service Center. The union again challenged testimony and evidence from the arbitration proceeding. The Authority found that these points repeated arguments it had already considered. Because disagreement with the earlier decision did not establish extraordinary circumstances, it denied reconsideration.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Reconsideration for extraordinary circumstances under 5 C.F.R. § 2429.17.
• Outcome: Request for reconsideration denied.
• Key point: Repeating arguments about arbitration evidence did not justify reopening the Authority's decision.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v25 p613 ]

25:0613(47)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

25 FLRA No. 47

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
MID-AMERICA PROGRAM SERVICE CENTER
Activity

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1336
Union

Case No. 0-AR-1212

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

This case is before the Authority at this time on a request filed by the Union seeking reconsideration of our decision of October 9, 1986, denying the Union's exceptions to the award of Arbitrator John R. Thornell.

In denying the Union's exceptions we concluded that the Union failed to establish that the Arbitrator's award was deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122(a) of the Statute; that is, that the award was contrary to any law, rule, or regulation, or that the award was deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. In its request for reconsideration, the Union contends that the Authority's decision is contrary to law, rule and regulation. In support of its contention, the Union reiterates arguments made in its exceptions concerning testimony and evidence presented in the proceeding before the Arbitrator.

Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations permit a party that can establish "extraordinary circumstances" to request reconsideration of a decision of the Authority. Here, however, we conclude that the Union has not established "extraordinary circumstances" within the meaning of section 2429.17. Rather, the arguments presented by the Union in support of its request essentially constitute nothing more than disagreement with the merits of the Authority's decision and an attempt to relitigate the matter.

Accordingly, the Union's request for reconsideration is denied.

Issued, Washington, D.C., February 6, 1987. Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman Henry B. Frazier III, Member Jean McKee, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY