General Services Administration and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1733 (Authority decision, June 13, 1983)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority denied exceptions to an arbitration award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122. Judicial review of an arbitration order is generally excluded by 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1) unless it involves an unfair labor practice under § 7118. This decision does not address an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

A Federal Protective Officer was reprimanded for refusing a supervisor’s instruction to issue a parking ticket. An arbitrator found just cause for the reprimand. The union argued that the arbitrator overlooked parts of the employee’s grievance and the consequences of obeying the instruction. The Authority found those objections were attempts to relitigate the evidence and denied the exception.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration exception review under 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).
• Outcome: Union exception denied; reprimand award remained in place.
• Key point: The union’s disagreement with the arbitrator’s reasoning did not show a deficient award.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v12 p194 ]

12:0194(48)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

12 FLRA No. 48

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
(Agency)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1733
(Union)

Case No. O-AR-472

DECISION

This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator Nicholas H. Zumas filed by the Union 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 Agency's reprimand of the grievant, a Federal Protective Officer, for insubordination in refusing to comply with the instructions of a supervisor to issue a ticket for an allegedly illegally parked vehicle. As his award, the Arbitrator determined that the reprimand was for just cause.

In its exception, the Union contends that the Arbitrator failed to mention elements of the grievant's defense and to make certain findings and conclusions as to whether the vehicle in question was legally parked and the possible consequences the grievant could have suffered if he had obeyed the supervisor's instructions. Upon careful consideration of the entire record before the Authority, including the parties' contentions, the Authority concludes that none of the contentions raised by the Union provides a basis for finding the award deficient. It is clear that the Union is merely attempting to relitigate the merits of the case before the Authority and that the thrust of the exception constitutes disagreement with the Arbitrator's reasoning and conclusions based on the evidence and testimony before him. Such disagreement does not provide a bassi for finding the award deficient. E.g., Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, United States Navy and Local R4-2, National Association of Government Employees, 5 FLRA No. 29 (1981).

Accordingly, the Union's exception is denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., June 13, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY