Veterans Administration, Hines Hospital and Illinois Nurses Association, Hines Unit (Authority decision, September 28, 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

A nurse challenged a satisfactory proficiency rating through a grievance. The arbitrator found that the parties’ agreement excluded dissatisfaction with proficiency ratings from the grievance procedure. The Illinois Nurses Association argued that the agreement permitted the grievance, but the Authority treated the exception as disagreement with the arbitrator’s contract interpretation. It denied the exception and left the nonarbitrability ruling in place.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union exception denied; award finding the rating grievance nonarbitrable stands.
• Key point: Disagreement with an arbitrator’s contract interpretation did not make the award deficient.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v13 p131 ]

13:0131(31)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

13 FLRA No. 31

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION,
HINES HOSPITAL
Activity

and

ILLINOIS NURSES ASSOCIATION,
HINES UNIT
Union

Case No. O-AR-301

DECISION

This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator Julius Rezler 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 Agency filed an opposition.

The parties submitted to arbitration an initial issue of whether the grievance in this case, which complained of a proficiency rating of satisfactory, was grievable and arbitrable under the parties' collective bargaining agreement. The Arbitrator determined under the provisions of the parties' agreement that grievances arising from dissatisfaction with proficiency ratings were excluded from the grievance procedure. Accordingly, as his award the Arbitrator ruled that the grievance was not arbitrable.

In its exception the Union contends that the Arbitrator erred because there is no question that under the express provisions of the agreement, the grievance in this case is arbitrable. The Union's exception, however, clearly constitutes nothing more than disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation of the provisions of the agreement. Thus, the exception provides no basis for finding the award deficient. See, e.g., U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, Raybrook, New York and American Federation of Government Employees, Council of Prison Locals, 9 FLRA No. 130 (1982); Social Security Administration, Great Lakes Program Service Center and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1395, 9 FLRA No. 129 (1982). Accordingly, the Union's exception is denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., September 28, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY