Department of the Air Force, Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 916 (Authority decision, July 31, 1987)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the union's exceptions to an arbitration award upholding sick leave counseling at Tinker Air Force Base. 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

Tinker Air Force Base counseled an employee after she used 177 hours of sick leave in roughly seven months, often in short periods near weekends. An arbitrator found that the counseling was not discipline under the labor agreement or Air Force rules and that the union had not shown it lacked just cause. The union challenged the award as contrary to the agreement and regulations. The Authority found no basis under the arbitration review statute to set the award aside and denied the exceptions. The grievance denial stands.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration review under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied; counseling grievance remains denied.
• Key point: The union did not establish that the arbitrator's treatment of the counseling conflicted with the agreement or Air Force rules.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v28 p364 ]
28:0364(58)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

28 FLRA NO. 58

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
OKLAHOMA CITY AIR LOGISTICS
CENTER, TINKER AIR FORCE BASE
OKLAHOMA

Agency

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
LOCAL 916, AFL-CIO

Union

Case No. 0-AR-1370

DECISION

I. Statement of the Case

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

II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

The grievant in this case was counseled for having used 177 hours of sick leave in approximately 7 months while having earned only 64 hours of such leave. The counseling also occurred because the grievant had taken sick leave in 1 or 2 day increments, many of which were in conjunction with weekends. A grievance was filed contesting the counseling and the matter was submitted to arbitration.

The Arbitrator framed the issue before him as follows: "Did the employer violate the provisions of the (parties') Agreement or any applicable regulations by counseling the grievant . . . for excessive usage of her sick leave." The Arbitrator determined, among other things, that: (1) the counseling was not disciplinary according to the parties' agreement and the Agency's regulations; and (2) the Union did not meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the Agency did not have just cause to counsel the grievant. As his award, the Arbitrator denied the grievance.

III. Discussion

The Union contends that the award is deficient because it is contrary to various sections of the parties' agreement and Air Force regulations.

We conclude that the Union has failed to establish that the Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122 (a) of the Statute; that is, that the award is contrary to any law, rule or regulation, or that the award is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. See, for example, Air Force Logistics Commend, Tinker Air Force Base and American Federation of Government Employees, Local Union 916, Council 214, 27 FLRA No. 21 (1987) (denying exceptions alleging that the award is contrary to Air Force regulation and the parties' agreement) and the cases cited therein. Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied.

Issued, Washington. D.C., July 31, 1987.

Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman

Henry B. Frazier III, Member

Jean McKee, Member

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY