American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2 and Harry Diamond Laboratories, U.S. Department of the Army (Authority decision, August 16, 1984)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismissed exceptions to an arbitration award concerning a removal because 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f) and 7122(a) place that award outside its review jurisdiction. The decision states that judicial review of the arbitration award may be sought under 5 U.S.C. § 7703.

Plain-English summary

An Army employee at Harry Diamond Laboratories was suspended for 30 days and then removed. An arbitrator found the removal justified based on extensive absenteeism, but linked its final result to a separate pending arbitration over the suspension. AFGE Local 2 filed exceptions to the removal award. The Authority held that removal and suspensions longer than 14 days fall under a statutory review route it cannot administer. It dismissed the exceptions for lack of jurisdiction and identified judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7703 as the available route.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Arbitration review exclusion under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f) and 7122(a).
• Outcome: Exceptions dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Key point: The FLRA cannot review an arbitration award relating to a removal covered by 5 U.S.C. § 7512.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v15 p560 ]

15:0560(118)AR

The decision of the Authority follows:

15 FLRA No. 118

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2
Union

and

HARRY DIAMOND LABORATORIES,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Activity

Case No. O-AR-820

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

This case is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Joseph M. Stone filed by the Union pursuant to section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and section 2425.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. For the reasons stated below, the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Union's exceptions and they must be dismissed on that basis.

The dispute in this matter arose when the grievant was suspended for thirty days and then removed from her position. Grievances arising from both disciplinary actions proceeded independently to arbitration. In regard to the removal action, the Arbitrator found that based on the grievant's extensive absenteeism, the Activity's action was justified. As his award, recognizing that the arbitration regarding the thirty day suspension was pending, the Arbitrator essentially held that should the suspension grievance be denied, the removal grievance would also be denied; should the suspension grievance be sustained, the removal grievance would also be sustained. The Union then filed the instant exceptions with the Authority.

Section 7122(a) of the Statute provides in pertinent part:

Either party to arbitration under this chapter may file with the Authority an exception to any arbitrator's award pursuant to the arbitration (other than an award relating to a matter described in section 7121(f) of this title).

The matters described in section 7121(f) of the Statute include those covered under 5 U.S.C. 7512 which applies to specified adverse actions, including suspensions for more than fourteen days and removals. Pursuant to section 7121(f), review of an arbitration award relating to such matters must be obtained in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 7703, i.e., in the same manner and under the same conditions as judicial review of a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Since the Arbitrator's award in this case involves a matter covered by 5 U.S.C. 7512, under section 7122(a) of the Statute, the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Union's exceptions. Rather, judicial review of the Arbitrator's award may be sought pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 7703.

Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the Union's exceptions are hereby dismissed.

For the Authority.

Issued, Washington, D.C., August 16, 1984
Jan K. Bohren
Executive Director/Administrator