Barton v. IFPTE Local 4, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (agency decision, April 8, 2021)

Plain-English summary

Joseph Barton and IFPTE Local 4 jointly asked the ALJ to approve their settlement of a labor standards-of-conduct case. The parties represented that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate, and the ALJ approved it. The case then went to the Board under the Civil Service Reform Act's automatic-review provisions. Neither party appealed the ALJ's order, so the Board treated the settlement as unopposed, adopted the recommended decision, and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: 5 U.S.C. §§ 7101 et seq.; 29 U.S.C. § 401; 29 C.F.R. §§ 458.88(b) and 458.91(a)
• Outcome: Settlement approved and complaint dismissed with prejudice.
• Key point: On automatic review, the Board adopted the ALJ's approval of an unopposed settlement that the parties represented was fair, reasonable, and adequate.

Full text (DOL official public release)

U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001

In the Matter of:


JOSEPH J. BARTON,                               ARB CASE NO. 2021-0025

            COMPLAINANT,                        ALJ CASE NO. 2020-SOC-00002

      v.                                        DATE: April 8, 2021

IFPTE LOCAL 4, PORTSMOUTH
NAVAL SHIPYARD,

            RESPONDENT.


Before: James D. McGinley, Chief Administrative Appeals Judge, and
Thomas H. Burrell, Administrative Appeals Judge


             DECISION AND ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
             AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE


       PER CURIAM. This case arises under Title VII of the Civil Service Reform
Act of 1978 (CSRA), 5 U.S.C. §§ 7101, et seq. (1978); the Labor-Management
Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA), Pub. L. No. 86-257, 73 Stat. 519 (1959)
(codified as amended in scattered sections of 29 U.S.C. beginning with 29 U.S.C. §
401); the regulations issued pursuant to the LMRDA at 29 C.F.R. Parts 451-53 (2020);
and the Standards of Conduct Regulations (SOC) issued pursuant to the CSRA at 29
C.F.R. Parts 457-459 (2020).

       Before the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) assigned to the case, counsel for
Employer filed a Joint Notice of Settlement and Motion for Approval of Settlement
Agreement (“Motion”). The Settlement Agreement was included as Exhibit 1 to the
joint motion. The Motion and Settlement Agreement were signed by the pro se
Complainant, Joseph Barton, and by the President for the International Federation of
Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE) Local 4, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
(“Local 4”), Larry Davis. The ALJ attached the Settlement Agreement to the ALJ’s
Order.

       The parties represented to the ALJ that they believed the proposed resolution
of this case was within the range of fair, reasonable, and adequate outcomes. Having
reviewed the proposed resolution, the ALJ saw no basis for doubting the parties’
representation, accepted that it was as represented, and approved the settlement.
   The case is now before the Administrative Review Board [ARB] pursuant to

the CSRA’s automatic review provisions.1 Neither of the parties appealed the ALJ’s order. We therefore deem the settlement unopposed under its terms. In light of these considerations, we ADOPT the ALJ’s recommended decision and order and DISMISS the complaint with prejudice.2

   SO ORDERED.

1 See 29 C.F.R. § 458.88(b) (“. . . the [ALJ] shall transfer the case to the [ARB] including his recommended decision and order and the record.”); 29 C.F.R. § 458.91(a) (“After consideration of the [ALJ’s] recommended decision and order, the record, and any exceptions filed, the [ARB] shall issue its decision affirming or reversing the [ALJ], in whole, or in part, or making such other disposition of the matter as it deems appropriate” . . .). 2 29 C.F.R. 458.91(a) (. . . “the [ARB] may, at its discretion, adopt without discussion the recommended decision and order of the [ALJ], as contained in his recommended decision and order, shall, upon appropriate notice to the parties, automatically become the decision of the [ARB].”).