American Federation of Government Employees, Local 953 (Union) and United States Department of the Army, U.S. Corps of Engineers, Little Rock, Arkansas (Agency) (Authority decision, April 8, 2015)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority dismissing exceptions to an arbitral award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a). Judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a) generally does not extend to an order involving an arbitral award unless the order involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision does not state that it involves an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

The union challenged an arbitration award involving the Army Corps of Engineers in Little Rock. The Authority dismissed the union's exceptions because the union should have raised its arguments before the arbitrator and the record did not show that it did so. The Authority issued an abbreviated decision that does not describe the underlying grievance or the arbitrator's ruling.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a); 5 C.F.R. §§ 2425.4(c), 2425.7, and 2429.5
• Outcome: The Authority dismissed the union's exceptions without reaching their merits.
• Key point: Arguments that could have been presented to the arbitrator could not be raised for the first time in exceptions.

Full text (FLRA public release)

68 FLRA No. 73

AMERICAN FEDERATION

OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 953

(Union)

and

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS

(Agency)

0‑AR‑5100

_____

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

April 8, 2015

_____

Before the Authority: Carol Waller Pope, Chairman, and

Ernest DuBester and Patrick Pizzella, Members

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Patrick J. Halter filed by the Union under § 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute[1] and part 2425 of the Authority’s Regulations.[2] The Agency filed an opposition to the Union’s exceptions.

We have determined that this case is appropriate for issuance as an expedited, abbreviated decision under § 2425.7 of the Authority’s Regulations.[3]

Sections 2425.4(c) and 2429.5 of the Authority’s Regulations bar consideration of the Union’s exceptions.[4] The Union should have known to raise these arguments before the Arbitrator, but the record does not reflect that the Union did so. Therefore, we dismiss the exceptions.[5]

Accordingly, we dismiss the Union’s exceptions.

[1] 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).

[2] 5 C.F.R. pt. 2425.

[3] Id. § 2425.7 (“Even absent a [party’s] request, the Authority may issue expedited, abbreviated decisions in appropriate cases.”).

[4] Id. §§ 2425.4(c), 2429.5.

[5] U.S. DHS, U.S. CBP, 66 FLRA 335, 337-38 (2011) (where a party should have known to make an argument to the arbitrator, but the record does not indicate that the party did so, §§ 2425.4(c) and 2429.5 of the Authority’s Regulations bar the party from raising that argument to the Authority).