American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3615 and Social Security Administration, Office of Hearings and Appeals, Falls Church, Virginia (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 Social Security Administration Office of Hearings and Appeals in Falls Church challenged an arbitration award. The Authority rejected claims that the arbitrator exceeded his authority, relied on a nonfact, or issued an award that failed to draw its essence from the agreement. An objection to the timing of the award raised only after issuance also provided no basis for relief. The decision does not describe the underlying grievance or remedy. The union’s exceptions were denied.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration-award review under federal labor law.
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied; award stands.
• Key point: An untimeliness objection first raised after an award issues does not establish a deficiency.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v55 p702 ]

55 FLRA No. 126

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3615

(Union)

and

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA

(Agency)

0-AR-3182

_____

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 Joseph M. Sharnoff 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.

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 Navy, Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 22, 51 FLRA 305, 307-08 (1995) (award not deficient on ground that arbitrator exceeded his authority where excepting party does not establish that arbitrator failed to resolve an issue submitted to arbitration, disregarded specific limitations on his authority, or awarded relief to persons who were not encompassed within the grievance); 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 [ v55 p703 ] arbitrator); American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2029 and U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Distribution Region West, Tracy Depot, Tracy, California, 48 FLRA 95 (1993) (an exception claiming, only after an award has issued, that the award is deficient because it was not timely, provides no basis for finding the award deficient); 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.