U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Distribution Region West, Stockton, California and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1857 (Authority decision, September 24, 1993)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the union's request for reconsideration and leaves its earlier order setting aside an arbitration award in place. 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 resolve an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

An arbitrator awarded overtime pay to two Defense Logistics Agency employees, but the Authority set aside the award because it lacked findings required by the Back Pay Act. The union sought reconsideration, saying the parties and arbitrator had agreed on a simple yes-or-no decision and asking to return the case so the arbitrator could expand his award. The Authority held that disagreement with its earlier ruling did not establish extraordinary circumstances for reconsideration. It also found no basis to return the deficient award to the arbitrator. The request was denied, leaving the overtime award set aside.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Reconsideration under 5 C.F.R. § 2429.17; backpay requirements under 5 U.S.C. § 5596.
• Outcome: Reconsideration denied; earlier decision setting aside overtime backpay award stands.
• Key point: A request to expand an arbitration award did not cure the missing Back Pay Act findings or justify reconsideration.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v48 p543 ]
48:0543(52)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

48 FLRA No. 52

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

_____

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

DEFENSE DISTRIBUTION REGION WEST

STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA

(Agency)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 1857

(Union)

0-AR-2424

(48 FLRA 221 (1993))

_____

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

September 24, 1993

_____

Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and
Armendariz.

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on the Union's request for reconsideration of our decision in 48 FLRA 221 (1993). The Agency filed an opposition to the Union's request.(*)

For the following reasons, we conclude that the Union has failed to establish that extraordinary circumstances exist warranting reconsideration of our decision. Accordingly, we will deny the Union's request for reconsideration.

II. Arbitrator's Award and the Decision in 48 FLRA 221

In 48 FLRA 221, the Union had filed grievances on behalf of two grievants who alleged that they were improperly denied overtime work to which they were entitled. The Arbitrator sustained the grievances and awarded overtime pay to both grievants.

We concluded that the Arbitrator did not find, as required by the Back Pay Act, 5 U.S.C. § 5596, that the grievants had been affected by an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action. We noted that the fact that the case was processed through the parties' expedited arbitration procedure did not relieve the Arbitrator of the obligation to satisfy the requirements of the Back Pay Act. Consequently, because the Arbitrator's award did not contain the findings necessary to sustain an award of backpay under the Back Pay Act, we set the award aside.

III. Request for Reconsideration

The Union asserts that there was an agreement between the Agency, the Union, and the Arbitrator, "made on the day of the [h]earing, that the Arbitrator would render a simple 'yes' or 'no' decision." Request for Reconsideration. The Union contends that the Agency was dissatisfied with the Arbitrator's decision and that the Agency repudiated that agreement. Therefore, the Union requests that we remand the case to the Arbitrator so that he can be given an opportunity to "reconvene with the parties to find out what went wrong" and "expand on his original decision . . . ." Id.

IV. Opposition

The Agency argues that the Union has not established extraordinary circumstances warranting reconsideration of the Authority's decision. The Agency asserts that the Union's arguments are nothing more than disagreement with, and an attempt to relitigate, the merits of the decision. The Agency also contends that the Authority should deny the Union's request that the award be remanded to the Arbitrator because the Authority has consistently ruled that it will not remand awards that are deficient under the Back Pay Act.

V. Analysis and Conclusions

Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations permits a party that can establish extraordinary circumstances to request reconsideration of an Authority decision. We conclude that the Union has failed to establish that extraordinary circumstances exist which warrant reconsideration of our decision. Rather, the Union's request for reconsideration constitutes mere disagreement with our conclusions in 48 FLRA 221, and is an attempt to relitigate the merits of the case. Further, with respect to the Union's request that we remand the award to the Arbitrator so that he can expand on his original award, we find that the Union has not demonstrated that remand of the deficient award is warranted in these circumstances. Accordingly, we will deny the Union's request for reconsideration. See, for example, American Federation of Government Employees, Local 96 and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Center, St. Louis, Missouri, 47 FLRA 1246 (1993).

VI. Order

The Union's request for reconsideration is denied.

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

*/ The Agency filed a motion for leave
to file its opposition. We grant the motion. See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Center, Allen Park, Michigan and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 933, 41 FLRA 1429 (1991).