Air Force Logistics Command, Tinker Air Force Base and American Federation of Government Employees, Local Union 916, Council 214 (Authority decision, May 28, 1987)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denies the union’s exceptions to an arbitration award allowing written reports in an employee’s personnel file. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1), orders involving arbitral awards are generally excluded from judicial review unless they involve an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision does not state that it involves one.

Plain-English summary

A Tinker Air Force Base employee was assigned weekend overtime and received leave for a Saturday doctor’s appointment. An arbitrator found that he neither called his supervisor afterward nor reported to work on either day, and upheld written reports placed in his personnel file. The union argued that the award conflicted with an Air Force overtime regulation and the local labor agreement. The Authority found no defect under the federal labor statute and denied the exceptions.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration exceptions under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union’s exceptions denied; written reports remain in the file.
• Key point: Disagreement with the arbitrator’s application of an overtime regulation and labor agreement did not invalidate the award.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v27 p112 ]

27:0112(21)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

27 FLRA No. 21

AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND,
TINKER AIR FORCE BASE
Activity

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL UNION 916,
COUNCIL 214
Union

Case No. O-AR-1338

DECISION

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Edmund W. Schedler, Jr. 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 Rules and Regulations.

II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

The grievant was notified that overtime was required on Saturday and Sunday, October 18 and 19, 1986. The grievant informed his supervisor that he had a doctor's appointment on Saturday morning. His supervisor excused the grievant from work for purposes of the doctor's appointment, but directed the grievant to call her after the appointment. The grievant received from his doctor on Saturday, October 26 a medical report stating that he should not work more than 40 hours per week. The grievant did not call his supervisor and he did not report for work on either Saturday or Sunday. On Monday the grievants' supervisor placed in the grievant's personnel file a written report of the incidents on Saturday and Sunday. The grievant filed a grievance over each day disputing that a written report was warranted.

The Arbitrator denied the grievances. The Arbitrator concluded that the grievant was not excused from work on the weekend. He was granted sick leave for purposes of his doctor's appointment. The Arbitrator further concluded that the grievant was directed to call his supervisor or report to work and that on both days, he did neither. Accordingly, the Arbitrator ruled that there was sufficient reason to place a written report of the incidents in the grievant's personnel file.

III. Discussion

The Union contends that the award is contrary to provisions of Air Force Regulation 40-552 (pertaining to when an employee will be excused from overtime work) and to Article 14 (Overtime) of the parties' local supplementary agreement.

We conclude that the Union has failed to establish that the Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122(a) of the Statute; that is, that the award is contrary to any law, rule or regulation, or that the award is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private sector labor-management relations cases. See, for example, Department of the Air Force, McGuire Air Force Base and American Federation of Government Employees, Local No. 1778, 6 FLRA 283 (1981) (the union's contention that the award was contrary to an Air Force regulation was nothing more than an attempt to relitigate the merits of the grievance before the Authority and provided no basis for finding the award deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute); U.S. Marine Corps, Logistics Base, Barstow and American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1482, 10 FLRA 55 (1982) (the union's contention that the award was contrary to the collective bargaining agreement constituted disagreement with the arbitrator's interpretation of the agreement, an attempt to relitigate the merits of the grievance before the Authority and provided no basis for finding the award deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute). Accordingly, the Union exceptions are denied.

Issued, Washington, D.C., May 28, 1987.

/s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
/s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
/s/ Jean McKee, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY