Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, San Juan and National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 109 (Authority decision, September 22, 1983)

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

Employees traveled to mandatory training outside regular work hours without compensation. An arbitrator denied the union’s grievance alleging that the agency should have scheduled travel during work hours. The union argued that the arbitrator also should have decided whether two employees were owed pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Authority held that the parties had not shown they submitted that pay question to arbitration and denied the exceptions.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union exceptions denied; award rejecting the scheduling grievance stands.
• Key point: An arbitrator did not exceed authority by deciding the issue submitted rather than an unsubmitted pay question.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v13 p72 ]

13:0072(17)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

13 FLRA No. 17

BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO
AND FIREARMS, SAN JUAN,
PUERTO RICO
Activity

and

NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES
UNION CHAPTER 109
Union

Case No. O-AR-241

DECISION

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator James J. Sherman 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.

The dispute in this matter concerns the scheduling of a training course at such a time that the grievants in order to attend the training were required to travel during nonwork hours for which they are not compensated. A grievance was filed and submitted to arbitration.

The Arbitrator stated the issue to be resolved as follows:

Whether the Agency violated the collective agreement by failing to schedule and arrange for travel, connected with a mandatory Agency training course, to occur within regular work hours, and, if so, what is the appropriate remedy?

The Arbitrator essentially determined that a violation of the parties' collective bargaining agreement had not been proven, and accordingly he denied the grievance.

In its exceptions the Union essentially claims that the award is deficient because the Arbitrator failed to address or resolve the issue of whether two of the grievants were entitled to be compensated for their travel time pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Thus, the Union contends that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority and the award does not draw its essence from the collective bargaining agreement.

The Authority finds that the Union's exceptions provide no basis for finding the award deficient. It is not apparent that the parties jointly stipulated and submitted for resolution by the Arbitrator the issue of whether the grievants were entitled under the Fair Labor Standards Act to have been compensated for their travel time. With no such submission agreement, the Union has not shown that it was improper for the Arbitrator to frame the issue as he did and to resolve precisely that issue in his decision. See Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base and National Association of Government Employees, Local No. R7-23, 4 FLRA 712 (1980). Accordingly, the exceptions do not establish that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority or that the award does not draw its essence from the collective bargaining agreement, and they are therefore denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., September 22, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY