U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Contract Audit Agency, Central Region and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3529 (Authority decision, May 21, 1998)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the agency's exceptions to an arbitration award, ending this proceeding before the Authority. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1), judicial review of an Authority order involving an arbitration award is generally excluded unless the order involves an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

The Defense Contract Audit Agency's Central Region challenged an arbitrator's award involving AFGE Local 3529. The Authority found no deficiency under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a) and denied the exceptions. In a footnote, it rejected the agency's reliance on a prior case about grievance routes for bargaining unit and nonunit positions because the contract language there differed from the language here. The short release does not describe the underlying grievance or the award's terms.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration exceptions under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Agency's exceptions denied; award left intact.
• Key point: The cited grievance route precedent turned on contract wording absent from this agreement.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v54 p208 ]
54:0208(25)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

54 FLRA No. 25

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

_____

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

CENTRAL REGION

(Agency)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 3529

(Union)

0-AR-3011

_____

DECISION

May 21, 1998

_____

Before the Authority: Phyllis N. Segal, Chair;
Donald S. Wasserman and Dale Cabaniss, Members.

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Harry Weisbrod filed by the Agency under section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Regulations. The Union filed an opposition to the Agency's exceptions.

Under section 7122(a) of the Statute, an award is deficient if it is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation; or it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. Upon careful consideration of the entire record in this case, the Authority concludes that the award is not deficient on any of the grounds raised in the exceptions and set forth in section 7122(a).(*)

Accordingly, the Agency's exceptions are denied.

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

*/ The Agency excepts to the
Arbitrator's determination that the grievance is substantively arbitrable by relying, in part, on the Authority's decision in U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas and American Federation of Government Employees, Council of Prisons, Local 919, 53 FLRA 29 (1997) (Local 919). However, Local 919 involved a contract provision that is different from the one involved here. The wording of the contract provision in Local 919 expressly stated that the route for resolving disputes concerning supervisory and management positions was the "agency grievance procedure[,]" while the route for resolving disputes concerning bargaining unit positions was "the procedures contained in the Master Agreement." 53 FLRA at 31, n.1 (emphasis in original). Here, the parties' agreement does not include such specific language with respect to the grievance route for unit and non-unit positions. Thus, the Authority's finding in Local 919 that the award failed to draw its essence from the parties' agreement does not provide a basis for making the same finding here.