American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3369 and Social Security Administration, New York Region (Authority decision, December 18, 1984)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order dismissing exceptions to an arbitration award for lack of Authority jurisdiction. Under 5 U.S.C. § 7121(f), the underlying award concerns a matter subject to the separate review provisions of § 7703, so exceptions cannot be filed with the Authority under § 7122(a). This Authority order does not create a 60-day court review route under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a)(1).

Plain-English summary

An arbitrator ordered grade and pay retention benefits for an SSA mail and supply clerk reduced from GS-4 to GS-3 after a position reclassification. The SSA filed exceptions to that award with the Authority. The Authority held that, because the employee had been reduced in grade without retention benefits, the award concerned an adverse action covered by 5 U.S.C. § 7512 and the separate review route in § 7121(f). It dismissed the agency's exceptions for lack of jurisdiction without deciding whether the arbitrator's benefits ruling was correct.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration exception jurisdiction under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f) and 7122(a).
• Outcome: The agency's exceptions were dismissed for lack of Authority jurisdiction.
• Key point: The Authority could not hear exceptions to this grade reduction award because the statute directs such matters to a different review route.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v16 p866 ]

16:0866(120)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

16 FLRA No. 120

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3369, AFL-CIO
Union

and

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
NEW YORK REGION
Activity

Case No. O-AR-681

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Daniel G. Collins 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. For the reasons that follow, the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Agency's exceptions, and therefore they must be dismissed.

The dispute in this matter concerns the grievant's reduction-in-grade from GS-4 to GS-3. The grievant's position of mail and supply clerk, GS-4, had been downgraded as a result of position reclassification to GS-3. The incumbents of the mail and supply clerk position, including the grievant, were offered training for a new GS-4 position. The grievant however signed a statement stating that he did not wish to assume the duties of the new position and he understood that he would be placed in the GS-3 position with a resulting loss of pay. Thereafter, the grievant was "change(d) to (a) lower grade" with the personnel action stating that it was at the grievant's request. A grievance was filed and submitted to arbitration claiming that the grievant was not demoted at his own request and that therefore he was entitled to have received grade and pay retention benefits under 5 U.S.C. chap. 53, subchap. VI /1/ as a result of the reclassification action. The Arbitrator determined that the grievant's demotion was not at his own request within the meaning of section 5362(d) and 5 CFR 536.207(a) /2/ and ordered that the grievant be accorded retroactively those rights for a demotion not at his own request.

The Authority has held that a reduction-in-grade is a matter covered under 5 U.S.C. 7512 /3/ and that therefore an award relating to a reduction-in-grade is a matter described in section 7121(f) of the Statute /4/ as to which no exceptions can be filed with the Authority under section 7122(a). E.g., Veterans Administration, Medical Center, Chillicothe, Ohio and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1631, AFL-CIO, 15 FLRA No. 92 (1984). At the same time the Authority and the courts have recognized that under 5 U.S.C. 5366(b)(1) the reduction-in-grade action which is the basis of an employee's entitlement to grade and pay retention benefits is not grievable under a grievance procedure negotiated under the Statute or appealable under statutory appeal procedures. San Antonio Air Logistics Center (AFLC), Kelly Air Force Base, Texas and American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1617, 10 FLRA 157 (1982); Atwell v. MSPB, 670 F.2d 272 (D.C. Cir. 1981). The court in Atwell specifically addressed the reconciliation of section 7512 and 5366 with respect to a reduction-in-grade. The court reconciled these provisions by concluding that only reductions-in-grade for which grade and pay retention benefits are provided are not appealable or grievable under section 5366(b) and that a reduction-in-grade without grade and pay retention benefits is a matter covered under section 7512. In terms of this case with the grievant having been reduced-in-grade without the provision of grade and pay retention benefits, the Authority finds that the Arbitrator's award relates to a matter covered by section 7512. Thus, the award relates to a matter described in section 7121(f) and therefore is an award as to which exceptions may not be filed under the Statute. Accordingly, the Agency's exceptions are dismissed. /5/

Issued, Washington, D.C., December 18, 1984

/s/ Henry B. Frazier III
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
/s/ Ronald W. Haughton
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------

/1/ Section 5362 provides for grade retention following a change of positions or reclassification and section 5363 provides for pay retention.

/2/ These provisions both provide that eligibility for grade and pay retention benefits ceases when an employee is demoted at the employee's own request.

/3/ Section 7512 enumerates the actions covered under 5 U.S.C. chap. 75, subchap. II.

/4/ Section 7121(f) pertinently provides:

In matters covered under section 4303 and 7512 of this title which have been raised under the negotiated grievance procedure in accordance with this section, section 7703 of this title pertaining to judicial review shall apply to the award of an arbitrator in the same manner and under the same conditions as if the matter had been decided by the Board.

/5/ The Agency has also filed a request for a stay of the award under part 2429 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. In view of this decision, the Agency's request is likewise dismissed.