National Association of Independent Labor, Local 5 (Union) and United States Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency, Distribution Red River, Texas (Agency) (Authority decision, April 28, 2011)

Final FLRA decision. This Authority order denies the union's exceptions to an arbitration award. 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. The released decision does not identify an unfair labor practice issue.

Plain-English summary

National Association of Independent Labor Local 5 challenged an arbitration award involving the Defense Logistics Agency's Red River distribution facility. The Authority denied the union's exceptions because they did not establish that the award was deficient under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a). Its brief release cites the standards for claims that an award is contrary to law, rests on a nonfact, or fails to draw its essence from an agreement. The release does not state the underlying grievance or the arbitrator's remedy.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a)
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied; arbitration award left in place.
• Key point: The union did not establish one of the statutory grounds for setting aside the award.

Full text (FLRA public release)

65 FLRA No. 160

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

OF INDEPENDENT LABOR

LOCAL 5

(Union)

and

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

DISTRIBUTION RED RIVER, TEXAS

(Agency)

0-AR-4736

_____

DECISION

April 28, 2011

_____

Before the Authority: Carol Waller Pope, Chairman, and Thomas M. Beck and Ernest DuBester, Members

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Carol Kyler filed by the Union under § 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 § 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 § 7122(a). See Fraternal Order of Police, Pentagon Police Labor Comm., 65 FLRA 781, 784-85 (2011) (denying a contrary-to-law exception where excepting party did not cite any law with which the arbitrator’s award conflicted); AFGE, Local 1802, 50 FLRA 396, 398 (1995) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party challenges a conclusion based on the arbitrator’s interpretation of the parties’ agreement); U.S. Dep’t of Labor (OSHA), 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 evidences a manifest disregard of the agreement).

Accordingly, the Union’s exceptions are denied.