Professional Airways Systems Specialists, District No. 1, MEBA/NMU (AFL-CIO) and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Southern Region (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 representing FAA Southern Region employees challenged an arbitration award as incomplete or ambiguous, contrary to law, and inconsistent with the agreement. The Authority rejected those exceptions. It also found no basis to address the union’s attorney-fee request because the arbitrator had not awarded backpay. The short decision does not describe the underlying grievance. Its opening paragraph mistakenly calls the opposed exceptions the agency’s, but both the filing statement and disposition identify them as the union’s.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration-award review under federal labor law.
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied; fee request not addressed.
• Key point: The union did not show that the award could not be implemented or that it conflicted with law or the agreement.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v55 p675 ]

55 FLRA No. 118

PROFESSIONAL AIRWAYS SYSTEMS

SPECIALISTS, DISTRICT NO. 1

MEBA/NMU (AFL-CIO)

(Union)

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

SOUTHERN REGION

(Agency)

0-AR-3189

_____

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 Stanley H. Sergent 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 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, 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 American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1869 and U.S. Department of the Air Force, Charleston Air Force Base, Charleston, South Carolina, 50 FLRA 172, 174 (1995) (award not deficient as being incomplete, ambiguous, or contradictory where excepting party fails to establish that implementation of the award is impossible); Professional Airways Systems Specialists, District No. 1, MEBA/NMU (AFL-CIO) and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aviation Systems Standards, Battle Creek Flight Inspection Field Office, Battle Creek, Michigan, 48 FLRA 764, 768-69 (1993) (award not deficient as contrary to law where excepting party fails to establish that the award is in any manner contrary to the law or regulation on which the party relies); 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. [n1]

Footnote # 1 for 55 FLRA No. 118

In view of our decision, and as the
Arbitrator did not award backpay, there is no basis for, and we do not address, the Union's request for attorney fees. See American Federation of Government Employees, Local 4015 and U.S. Department of the Navy, Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Virginia, 52 FLRA 82 (1996).