Georgia National Guard, Fort Stewart, Georgia and Georgia Association of Civilian Technicians Union (Authority decision, May 17, 1984)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority modified an arbitration 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.

Plain-English summary

A grievance challenged the selection of an employee for a general mechanic leader position at the Georgia National Guard. The arbitrator found that the selection did not fully follow the parties' merit promotion procedures. He ordered priority consideration for nine other candidates and barred consideration of other applicants for the next opening. The Authority held that the restriction on other applicants conflicted with management's statutory right to select from any appropriate source. It preserved priority consideration for the nine candidates but removed the restriction on whom the agency could consider.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Management's selection right under 5 U.S.C. § 7106(a)(2)(C).
• Outcome: Arbitration award modified to remove the restriction on other candidates.
• Key point: Priority consideration could remain, but the award could not limit the next selection to the original candidate group.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v14 p640 ]

14:0640(87)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

14 FLRA No. 87

GEORGIA NATIONAL GUARD,
FORT STEWART, GEORGIA
Activity

and

GEORGIA ASSOCIATION OF
CIVILIAN TECHNICIANS UNION
Union

Case No. O-AR-441

DECISION

This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator J. Earl Williams filed by the Agency under section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.

The dispute in this matter concerns the Activity's selection of three employees for a general mechanic leader position. A grievance was filed and submitted to arbitration challenging one of the selections. The Arbitrator essentially determined that the selection of that employee did not fully conform to the negotiated procedures for merit promotion of the parties' collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, his award was as follows:

The proper resolution of the subject grievance is to award "priority consideration" to the remaining nine candidates in question. Other employees will not be eligible for consideration for the next leader position for General Mechanic. After filling one more such position, other employees will be eligible to apply. Those receiving "priority consideration" will not be required to resubmit their SF 171s for certification.

In its exception the Agency contends that the award is contrary to section 7106(a)(2)(C) of the Statute. The Authority agrees.

The Authority has expressly held that section 7106(a)(2)(C) provides for management's right to select from among a group of properly ranked and certified candidates for promotion or from any appropriate source. U.S. Army Infantry Center, Ft. Benning, Georgia and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 54, AFL-CIO, 12 FLRA No. 38 (1983). Therefore, in terms of this case, the award to the extent that it requires the Activity to fill the next general mechanic leader position from only among the original nine candidates is deficient as contrary to section 7106(a)(2)(C) and must be modified accordingly. Therefore, the award is modified to provide as follows:

The proper resolution of the subject grievance is to award "priority consideration" to the remaining nine candidates in question. Those receiving "priority" consideration will not be required to resubmit their SF 171s for certification.

Issued, Washington, D.C., May 17, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY