Fleet Combat Training Center, Pacific and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3723 and John R. Jay (Authority decision, February 9, 1983)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismissed exceptions filed by a grievant who was not a party to arbitration. 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 order does not address an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

Employee John Jay filed exceptions to an arbitration award involving the Navy training center and the union. The Authority held that its rules allowed a party to the arbitration to file exceptions. Because the activity and union were the parties and Jay had not participated as a party, it dismissed his exceptions without reviewing the award.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration party definition and exceptions filing under 5 C.F.R. §§ 2421.11 and 2425.1(a).
• Outcome: Grievant’s exceptions dismissed for lack of party status.
• Key point: A grievant cannot file exceptions independently if not a party to the arbitration.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v11 p284 ]

11:0284(62)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

11 FLRA No. 62

FLEET COMBAT TRAINING CENTER, PACIFIC
(Activity)

and

INTERDEPARTMENTAL LOCAL 3723, AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO (Union)

and

JOHN R. JAY
(Grievant)

Case No. O-AR-498

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

This case comes before the Authority on the exceptions of Mr. John R. Jay, the grievant in the above-entitled matter, to the award of Arbitrator Charles S. Bunker. For the reasons set forth below, the subject exceptions must be dismissed.

Section 2425.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations provides:

Either party to arbitration under the provisions of chapter 71 of title 5 of the United States Code may file an exception to an arbitrator's award rendered pursuant to the arbitration.

Section 2421.11 of the Rules and Regulations provides in pertinent part:

"Party" means (a) any person . . . (4) who participated as a party . . . (ii) in a matter where the award of an arbitrator was issued . . . .

In this case, it appears that two parties (the union and the activity) participated as "parties" in the arbitration proceeding here involved. Thus, it does not appear that Mr. Jay, the grievant, participated as a "party" in the proceeding before the arbitrator. Consequently, the grievant is not entitled to file exceptions to the arbitrator's award under section 2425.1(a) of the Authority's Regulations.

Accordingly, since the grievant is not entitled to file exceptions to the subject arbitrator's award under the Rules and Regulations, and apart from other considerations,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the grievant's exceptions be, and they hereby are, dismissed. For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C., February 9, 1983

James J. Shepard, Executive
Director