American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923 and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Care Financing Administration, Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia (Authority decision, July 31, 1999)

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 such an order unless the order involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision resolves exceptions to an arbitration award and does not state that it involves an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

The union at the Health Care Financing Administration’s Atlanta regional office challenged an arbitration award. The Authority rejected the union’s nonfact claim and its claim that the award failed to draw its essence from the collective bargaining agreement. The brief decision does not identify the underlying grievance or the award’s remedy. The union’s exceptions were denied.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration-award review under federal labor law.
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied.
• Key point: The union did not establish a factual or contractual basis to set aside the award.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v55 p694 ]

55 FLRA No. 124

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1923

(Union)

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH AND HUMANSERVICES

HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION

REGION IV, ATLANTA, GEORGIA

(Agency)

0-AR-3177

_____

DECISION

July 31, 1999

_____

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 William D. Ferguson filed by the Union under section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Regulations. The Agency filed an opposition to the Union'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, and Authority precedent, the Authority concludes that the award is not deficient on the grounds raised in the exceptions and set forth in section 7122(a). See U.S. Department of the Air Force, Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colorado and National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1497, 48 FLRA 589, 593 (1993) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party either challenges a factual matter that the parties disputed at arbitration or fails to demonstrate that the central fact underlying the award is clearly erroneous, but for which a different result would have been reached by the arbitrator); United States Department of Labor (OSHA) and National Council of Field Labor Locals, 34 FLRA 573, 575 (1990) (award not deficient as failing to draw its essence from the parties' collective bargaining agreement where excepting party fails to establish that the award cannot in any rational way be derived from the agreement; is so unfounded in reason and fact and so unconnected to the wording and purpose of the agreement as to manifest an infidelity to the obligation of the arbitrator; does not represent a plausible interpretation of the agreement; or cannot in any rational way be derived from the agreement or evidences a manifest disregard of the agreement).

Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are
denied.