San Antonio Air Logistics Center, Kelly Air Force Base, Texas (Activity) and American Federation of Government Employees, Local Union 1617 (Union) (Authority decision, October 8, 1981)

Final FLRA decision. This order concerns exceptions to an arbitration award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1), such orders 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

A union filed exceptions to an arbitration award at Kelly Air Force Base, saying only that the award was contrary to law, rule, and regulation. It supplied no supporting argument or evidence and did not provide the promised supplement. The Authority dismissed the exceptions for failing to meet its filing requirements without deciding the award’s merits.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union exceptions dismissed as procedurally deficient.
• Key point: A bare assertion of legal error did not satisfy the required contents of an exception.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v07 p11 ]

07:0011(4)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

7 FLRA No. 4

SAN ANTONIO AIR LOGISTICS CENTER,
KELLY AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS
(Activity)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL UNION 1617
(Union)

Case No. O-AR-234

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON EXCEPTIONS TO THE AWARD OF
ARBITRATOR JOHN F. CARAWAY FILED ON BEHALF OF THE UNION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 7122(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
STATUTE ( U.S.C. 7122(A)) AND SECTION 2425.1 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES
AND REGULATIONS (5 U.F.R. 2425.1). FOR THE REASONS STATED BELOW, IT HAS
BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE UNION'S EXCEPTIONS MUST BE DISMISSED.

SECTION 2425.2 OF THE AUTHORITY'S REGULATIONS PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT
PART:

SEC. 2425.2 CONTENT OF EXCEPTION.

AN EXCEPTION MUST BE A DATED, SELF-CONTAINED DOCUMENT WHICH SETS
FORTH IN FULL:

(A) A STATEMENT OF THE GROUNDS ON WHICH REVIEW IS REQUESTED;

(B) EVIDENCE OR RULINGS BEARING ON THE ISSUES BEFORE THE AUTHORITY;

(C) ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE STATED GROUNDS, TOGETHER WITH
SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE

PERTINENT DOCUMENTS AND CITATIONS OF THE AUTHORITIES . . .

THE UNION'S EXCEPTIONS WERE DEFICIENT WHEN FILED IN THAT THE UNION,
WHILE STATING AS GROUNDS FOR REVIEW THAT THE AWARD "WAS CONTRARY TO LAW,
RULE AND REGULATION," DID NOT PROVIDE ANY ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF THAT
BARE ASSERTION OR ANY OTHER SUBMISSION IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2425.2(B) AND (C) OF THE AUTHORITY'S
REGULATIONS. THE UNION ASSURED THE AUTHORITY THAT THE DEFICIENCY WOULD
BE CORRECTED WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE EXCEPTIONS. HOWEVER,
NO FURTHER SUBMISSION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE UNION WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD
NOTED. THUS, SINCE THE UNION FAILED TO PROPERLY COMPLETE ITS EXCEPTIONS
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS, THE EXCEPTIONS
MUST BE DISMISSED AS PROCEDURALLY DEFICIENT.

ACCORDINGLY, THE UNION'S EXCEPTIONS ARE HEREBY DISMISSED.

FOR THE AUTHORITY.

ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., OCTOBER 8, 1981

JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR