U.S. Department of Defense, Military Entrance Processing Station, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1627 (Authority decision, August 24, 1992)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority involving an arbitral award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122. Judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a) generally does not extend to an order involving an arbitral award unless the order involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This order dismisses an employee's exceptions because she was not shown to be a party to the arbitration or authorized to file for the union.

Plain-English summary

Theresa Gasior, an employee at the Pittsburgh Military Entrance Processing Station, filed exceptions to an arbitration award on her own behalf. Authority rules permit a party to the arbitration to file exceptions. The award identified the agency and AFGE Local 1627 as the parties, and the union president's letter to Gasior did not show that she had participated as a party or was authorized to file for the union. The Authority dismissed her exceptions for lack of standing, leaving the arbitration award undisturbed.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 C.F.R. §§ 2425.1(a) and 2421.11(a)(4)(ii).
• Outcome: Employee's exceptions dismissed for lack of standing.
• Key point: An individual grievant must show party status in the arbitration or union authorization before filing exceptions to the award.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v45 p976 ]

45:0976(97)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

45 FLRA No. 97

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

MILITARY ENTRANCE PROCESSING STATION

PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

(Agency)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 1627

(Union)

0-AR-2327

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

August 24, 1992

The grievant, Theresa A. Gasior, filed exceptions to the
award of Arbitrator James W. McMullen in the above-captioned case. For the reasons set out below, Ms. Gasior's exceptions must be dismissed.

The Authority's Regulations provide that "[e]ither party " to
an arbitration proceeding "may file an exception to an
arbitrator's award rendered pursuant to the arbitration." 5 C.F.R. § 2425.1(a)(emphasis added). A "party" in the context of an arbitration proceeding is defined as "any person . . . who participated as a party . . . in a matter where the award of an arbitrator was issued[.] 5 C.F.R. § 2421.11(a)(4)(ii).

The Arbitrator's award indicates that the parties to the
arbitration proceeding were the Agency, represented by Ray L.
Cornell, and the Union, represented by James F. Shuey.

Ms. Gasior enclosed with her exceptions a letter to her from
the Union President dated August 5, 1992. The letter states that, "After a careful review of the Arbitrator's Decision, the Union .
. . believes that no further action will be taken. However, since you insist in filing an Exception with the . . . Authority, you may always do so on your own behalf." There is nothing in the letter that clearly shows that Ms. Gasior either participated as a "party" in the proceeding before the Arbitrator, or was authorized by the Union to file the exceptions presently before the Authority. See U.S. Department of the Army, Tooele Army Depot, Tooele, Utah and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Tooele Federal Lodge 2261, 38 FLRA 454 (1990).

Accordingly, Ms. Gasior's exceptions are dismissed for her
lack of standing as a party to file exceptions in the
above-captioned case.

For the Authority.

Alicia N. Columna

Director, Case Control Office

FOOTNOTES:
(If blank, the decision does not
have footnotes.)