Veterans Administration Medical Center and American Federation of Government Employees, Local No. 85 (Authority decision, November 12, 1987)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the agency's exception to an arbitration award sustaining an employee's 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

A union officer working in the Leavenworth VA Medical Center laundry received official time for union meetings. After an afternoon meeting was canceled, she returned to the laundry about 30 minutes late and received an absence without leave charge and written reprimand. An arbitrator found that the Medical Center had not documented the charge on time as its own policy required and sustained her grievance. The VA argued that the arbitrator misapplied its rules, but the Authority found no reviewable defect and denied the exception.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Review of an arbitration award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Agency's exception denied; AWOL reprimand set aside.
• Key point: The agency did not show that the arbitrator's application of its documentation policy made the award deficient.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v30 p39 ]

30:0039(10)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

30 FLRA NO. 10
30 FLRA 39

12 NOV 1987

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
MEDICAL CENTER

Activity

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL NO. 85

Union

Case No. 0-AR-1425

DECISION

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator Preston J. Moore filed by the Veterans Administration (the Agency) under section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. For the reasons stated below, the Agency's exception is denied.

II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

The grievant is a Union officer and an employee in the laundry at the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Leavenworth, Kansas. On December 4, 1986, the grievant's supervisor approved official time for the grievant for several meetings which she was scheduled to attend that day in her capacity as a Union representative. An afternoon meeting was cancelled, and the grievant returned to the laundry approximately 30 minutes late. She was charged for being absent without leave (AWOL) and was disciplined with a written reprimand. The employee grieved the AWOL charge and the matter was submitted to arbitration.

The issue before the Arbitrator was whether the Activity had just and sufficient cause to discipline the grievant because of unauthorized absence from work and whether the reprimand was a reasonable penalty for her second offense of this nature. Before the Arbitrator, there was conflicting evidence as to whether the supervisor approving the official time instructed the employee to return to the laundry immediately after the meeting Among other arguments, the Union referred to Medical Center policy 05-14, Paragraph 3 Procedure D, which indicates that failure to document the specific details surrounding an AWOL charge will nullify any subsequent disciplinary action taken as a result of the AWOL charge. The Arbitrator found that the Activity failed to timely document the AWOL charge and that, under the circumstances, there was no justification for the discipline issued. The Arbitrator sustained the grievance.

III. Discussion

As its exception, the Agency contends that the Arbitrator misconstrued Agency regulations by applying them to a situation for which they are not intended. The Union did not file an opposition to the Agency's exceptions.

We conclude that the Agency 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 relations cases. See, for example, Federal Correctional Institution, Petersburg, Virginia and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2052, Petersburg, Virginia, 13 FLRA 108 (1983) (exceptions, which merely attempt to relitigate the merits of the case before the Authority and constitute nothing more than disagreement with the arbitrator's findings of fact, his reasoning and conclusions, provide no basis for finding the award deficient).

Accordingly, the Agency's exception is denied.

Issued, Washington, D.C.,November 12, 1987.

Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman

Jean McKee, Member

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY