351st Combat Support Group, Whiteman Air Force Base and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2361 (Authority decision, December 18, 1987)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the union's exceptions to an arbitration award rejecting an overtime grievance. 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

Employees at Whiteman Air Force Base finished work but could not leave for 15 to 30 minutes because the gates were closed during a surprise emergency exercise. Their union sought overtime pay for the delay. An arbitrator found the grievance arbitrable but concluded that the employees were not involved in the exercise under the parties' agreement, so they were not entitled to overtime. The Authority found that the union's objections disagreed with the arbitrator's reading of the agreement and evidence without establishing a reviewable defect. It denied the exceptions, leaving the grievance denied.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration exceptions under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union's exceptions denied; overtime grievance remains denied.
• Key point: Being delayed by closed gates did not make these employees participants in the exercise under the arbitrator's reading of the agreement.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v30 p505 ]

30:0505(68)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

30 FLRA NO. 68
30 FLRA 505
18 DEC 1987

351ST COMBAT SUPPORT GROUP
WHITEMAN AIR FORCE BASE

Activity

and

LOCAL 2361, AMERICAN FEDERATION
OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

Union

Case No. 0-AR-1409

DECISION

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator John R. Thornell. The Arbitrator found that the employees were not entitled to overtime pay under the parties' collective bargaining agreement as claimed in the grievance. The exceptions were 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. We conclude that the Union has not established that the Arbitrator misinterpreted and misapplied the parties' agreement or that the Arbitrator failed to consider the evidence and testimony presented. We deny the Union's exceptions.

II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

During an inspection of the Air Base, the Inspector General from the Strategic Air Command conducted a surprise exercise to test the ability of the Base to respond to emergencies. All Air Base gates were closed for the exercise. The grievants had finished work and were attempting to leave the Base when the gates were closed. They were delayed from 15 to 30 minutes while the exercise continued. The Union filed a grievance on behalf of the employees, seeking overtime pay for the time they had been delayed.

The Arbitrator first determined, contrary to the Activity's position, that the grievance was arbitrable. On the merits, the Arbitrator found that the employees had not been "involved" in the exercise within the meaning of the parties' agreement. He concluded that they were not entitled to overtime pay under the agreement and he denied the grievance.

III. Discussion

The Union argues that the Arbitrator misinterpreted and misapplied the parties' agreement and failed to consider the evidence and testimony presented.

We have determined that the Union has failed to prove that the Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122 (a) of the Statute. Specifically, the Union has failed to establish that the award is contrary to any law, rule or regulation, or that it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by the Federal courts in private sector labor relations cases. See, for example, Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Virginia and Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees Metal Trades Council, 26 FLRA 799 (1987) (exceptions disagreeing with arbitrator's interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement provide no basis for finding an award deficient); Veterans Administration Medical Center, Kansas City, Missouri and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2663, 29 FLRA No. 64 (1987) (exceptions disagreeing with an arbitrator's evaluation of the evidence and testimony, especially the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony, provide no basis for finding an award deficient); Oklahoma Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 9161, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 30 FLRA No. 5 (1987) (exceptions which attempt to relitigate the merits of a grievance before the Authority and which constitute nothing more than disagreement with an arbitrator's findings of fact, reasoning and conclusions provide no basis for finding an award deficient).

IV. Decision

For the above reasons, the Union's exceptions are denied.

Issued, Washington, D.C., December 18, 1987.

Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman

Jean McKee, Member

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY