U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Center, Allen Park, Michigan and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 933 (Authority decision, December 21, 1989)
Allen Park VA Medical Center (FLRA 0-AR-1636): Removal award outside Authority jurisdiction
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Authority precedent from 1989, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismisses the union's exceptions for lack of jurisdiction because the arbitration award concerns a removal under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f) and 7512. Review of such an award may be sought in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit under 5 U.S.C. § 7703. The Authority does not decide the merits of the removal.
Plain-English summary
An arbitrator upheld the removal of a boiler plant operator at the Allen Park VA Medical Center after several absences without leave, including one that left the boilers unattended. The union argued that the award violated notice requirements and other law. The Authority held that it could not review exceptions to an arbitration award about a removal, and dismissed the case without reaching the union's arguments.
Decision snapshot
- Authority: Removal award review limits under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f), 7122(a), and 7512.
- Outcome: Union's exceptions dismissed for lack of Authority jurisdiction.
- Key point: Judicial review of an arbitration award concerning removal follows the Federal Circuit route in 5 U.S.C. § 7703.
Full text (FLRA public release)
[ v34 p27 ]
34:0027(7)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
34 FLRA No. 7
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
AUTHORITY
WASHINGTON, D.C.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
MEDICAL CENTER
ALLEN PARK,
MICHIGAN
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES
LOCAL 933
0-AR-1636
ORDER DISMISSING
EXCEPTIONS
December 21, 1989
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and
Armendariz.
I. Statement of the Case
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Barry C. Brown. The Arbitrator denied the grievance and sustained the grievant's removal from the Federal service. The exceptions were filed by the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 933 (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. The Veterans Administration, Allen Park Medical Center (the Agency) filed an opposition. Because the Arbitrator's award concerns the removal of the grievant from the Federal service, we are without jurisdiction to review the Union's exceptions. Accordingly, we will dismiss the Union's exceptions.
II. Background and Arbitrator's Award
The Agency removed the grievant from his position as a boiler plant operator on December 4, 1987, for being absent without leave (AWOL) several times. During one instance of AWOL, the grievant left the boilers unattended for 2 hours.
The Arbitrator found that leaving the boilers unattended for 2 hours was "a very serious act of misconduct." Award at 27. Furthermore, the Arbitrator noted that the Agency disciplined the grievant in writing for the third time in 4 months. The Arbitrator also determined that management did not violate the parties' agreement by failing to provide assistance to the grievant with his drug problem because the grievant denied he had a drug problem and refused management's offers of assistance. Award at 24-25. The Arbitrator also found that the grievant's confinement to a substance abuse center at the time of his removal was not a factor in the Agency's decision to terminate the grievant because the Agency was not notified of the grievant's admission to a center. Award at 25. Finally, the Arbitrator found that although the grievant received less than 30 days' notice of his proposed removal, this procedural defect was not fatal to the Agency's case because no harm to the grievant was shown. Award at 26-27.
III. Positions of the Parties
The Union contends that the Arbitrator's award is deficient because it is contrary to law, regulation, and the collective bargaining agreement. The Union argues that the grievant did not receive 30 days' advance written notice of his removal as required by 5 U.S.C. º 7513(b)(1). The Union also asserts that the Arbitrator failed to consider that the Veterans' Preference Act of 1944 entitles veterans to 30 days' advance notice of removal.
The Agency contends that the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Agency's exceptions because this case involves a removal action under 5 U.S.C. º 7121(f). The Agency argues that section 7121(f) of the Statute provides that removal actions must be appealed under the procedure applicable to cases decided by the Merit Systems Protection Board. Therefore, the Agency asserts that the Union must seek judicial review under 5 U.S.C. º 7703 instead of review by the Authority.
IV. Discussion
Section 7122(a) of the Statute provides, in pertinent part:
Either party to arbitration under this chapter may file with the Authority an exception to any arbitrator's award pursuant to the arbitration (other than an award relating to a matter described in section 7121(f) of this title). (Emphasis added.)
The matters described in section 7121(f) of the Statute include adverse actions, such as removals, under 5 U.S.C. º 7512. Review of arbitration awards relating to such matters, like review of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, may be sought by appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in accordance with 5 U.S.C. º 7703.
Because the Arbitrator's award concerns a matter covered by 5 U.S.C. º 7512, that is, the grievant's removal from the Federal service, exceptions to the award may not be filed with the Authority under section 7122(a) of the Statute. The Authority, therefore, is without jurisdiction to review the Union's exceptions. See, for example, National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 202 and Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service Headquarters Office, 32 FLRA 1075 (1988).
V. Order
Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are
dismissed.
FOOTNOTES:
(If blank, the decision does not
have footnotes.)
Does this precedent still control your case?
Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace