American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2094 (Union) and Veterans Administration Hospital (Activity)
[ v02 p697 ]
02:0697(88)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
2 FLRA No. 88
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO,
LOCAL 2094
Union
and
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL
Activity
Case No. 0-AR-24
DECISION
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE
AWARD OF ARBITRATOR BENJAMIN H. WOLF FILED BY THE UNION UNDER SECTION
7122(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5
U.S.C. SEC. 7122(A)).
ACCORDING TO THE ARBITRATOR, THE GRIEVANT, A MEDICAL TECHNICIAN
EMPLOYED AT THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL IN NEW YORK CITY,
CHALLENGED AN ADMONISHMENT ISSUED FOR HIS ALLEGED FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY
SEARCH FOR A PATIENT'S BLOOD BANK RECORD CARD. THE MATTER WAS
ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION.
BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, THE ARBITRATOR FOUND
THAT THE ONLY "CREDIBLE EXPLANATION" FOR THE GRIEVANT'S FAILURE TO FIND
THE PATIENT'S CARD WAS THE GRIEVANT'S "INADEQUATE SEARCH" AT THE BLOOD
BANK AND NOT THE DEFENSE ADVANCED BY THE UNION ON BEHALF OF THE
GRIEVANT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ARBITRATOR DENIED THE GRIEVANCE, FINDING IN
HIS AWARD THAT "JUST CAUSE" EXISTED FOR THE ACTION TAKEN AGAINST THE
GRIEVANT.
THE UNION FILED A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD
PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN 5 C.F.R.PART 2411(1978),
WHICH, TO THE EXTENT CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7122(A)
OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7122
(A)) AND AS AMENDED BY SECTION 2400.5 OF THE TRANSITION RULES AND
REGULATIONS OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (44 FED.REG.
44741), REMAIN OPERATIVE WITH RESPECT TO THIS CASE. THE UNION SEEKS
AUTHORITY ACCEPTANCE OF ITS PETITION ON THE BASIS OF THE EXCEPTION
DISCUSSED BELOW. THE AGENCY DID NOT FILE AN OPPOSITION.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2411.32 OF THE AMENDED RULES AND SECTION 7122(A)
OF THE STATUTE, THE AUTHORITY WILL GRANT A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN
ARBITRATOR'S AWARD WHERE IT APPEARS, BASED UPON THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED IN THE PETITION, THAT THE AWARD IS DEFICIENT
BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY TO LAW OR REGULATION, OR ON OTHER GROUNDS SIMILAR
TO THOSE APPLIED BY FEDERAL COURTS IN PRIVATE SECTOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT
RELATIONS CASES.
IN ITS EXCEPTION TO THE AWARD, THE UNION CONTENDS THAT THE AWARD IS
"CONTRARY TO LAW, RULE OR REGULATION." IN SUPPORT OF ITS EXCEPTION, THE
UNION ASSERTS THAT THE ARBITRATOR'S HANDLING OF THE CASE WAS "ARBITRARY
AND CAPRICIOUS," REFERRING TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7701(C)(1)(B) OF
TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, AND STATING THAT THE AGENCY, IN ITS CASE
BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR, DID NOT SUSTAIN THE BURDEN OF PROOF REQUIRED BY
THAT SECTION. /1/ THE UNION ALSO ASSERTS THAT THE ARBITRATOR WAS
ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS IN HIS HANDLING OF EVIDENCE PROFFERED BY THE
UNION AT THE HEARING, PARTICULARLY EVIDENCE REGARDING ALLEGED
HARRASSMENT OF THE GRIEVANT BY A SUPERIOR.
THE AUTHORITY WILL GRANT A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ARBITRATOR'S
AWARD WHERE IT APPEARS, BASED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES DESCRIBED
IN THE PETITION, THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES LAW OR REGULATION. HOWEVER, IN
THIS CASE THE UNION HAS NOT PRESENTED SUFFICIENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES
TO SUPPORTS ITS EXCEPTION.
THE UNION HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED IN ITS PETITION IN WHAT MANNER THE
ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF 5 U.S.C.
7701(C)(1)(B) AND, ON ITS FACE, THAT SECTION PERTAINING TO APPELLATE
REVIEW BY THE MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD WOULD APPEAR INAPPLICABLE
TO THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IN THIS CASE. /2/ AS TO THE UNION'S
ASSERTIONS REGARDING THE ARBITRATOR'S HANDLING OF EVIDENCE PROFFERED BY
THE UNION AT THE HEARING, IT APPEARS FROM THE ARBITRATOR'S "DISCUSSION"
OF THE CASE THAT HE CONSIDERED THE UNION'S CONTENTION REGARDING THE
ALLEGED HARASSMENT OF THE GRIEVANT. IN THIS REGARD, THE ARBITRATOR
STATED THAT "(N)O MATTER WHAT FAULT ONE MIGHT FIND WITH (THE SUPERIOR'S)
ATTITUDE TOWARDS (THE GRIEVANT), WE ARE FACED WITH THE FACT THAT (THE
GRIEVANT) DID NOT FIND . . . (THE) CARD, THE ONLY CREDIBLE EXPLANATION
BEING THAT HE MADE AN INADEQUATE SEARCH, A REQUIRED PROCEDURE AT THE
BLOOD BANK." THE UNION'S EXCEPTION IS IN EFFECT A DISAGREEMENT WITH THE
REASONING EMPLOYED BY THE ARBITRATOR IN REACHING HIS AWARD ON THE MERITS
THAT THE GRIEVANT'S ADMONISHMENT WAS FOR "JUST CAUSE." THE AUTHORITY
WILL NOT GRANT A PETITION FOR REVIEW WHERE IT APPEARS FROM THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENTED THAT THE PETITIONER IS DISAGREEING WITH THE
REASONING EMPLOYED BY THE ARBITRATOR ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE BEFORE
HIM. FEDERAL AVIATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION AND FEDERAL
AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, ALBUQUERQUE AIRWAY FACILITIES SECTOR, SOUTHWEST
REGION, CASE NO. O-AR-20,-- FLRA NO.-- (-- ,1980), REPORT NO.-- .
THEREFORE, THE UNION'S EXCEPTION PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR ACCEPTANCE OF ITS
PETITION UNDER 2411.32 OF THE AMENDED RULES.
ACCORDINGLY, THE UNIONS PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD
IS DENIED BECAUSE IT FAILS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2411.32
OF THE AMENDED RULES FOR ACCEPTANCE BY THE AUTHORITY OF A PETITION FOR
REVIEW OF AN ARBITRATOR'S AWARD.
ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., FEBRUARY 22, 1980.
RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
/1/ SECTION 7701 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, DEALS WITH APPELLATE
PROCEDURES OF THE MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD; SECTION 7701(C)(1)(B)
PROVIDES WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN CASES APPEALED TO THE BOARD THAT THE
DECISION OF THE AGENCY SHALL BE SUSTAINED ONLY IF THE AGENCY'S DECISION
IS SUPPORTED BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.
/2/ THE AUTHORITY NOTES THAT UNDER 5 U.S.C. 7121(E)(2), IN CERTAIN
MATTERS AN ARBITRATOR IS GOVERNED BY THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN 5 U.S.C.
7701(C)(1). HOWEVER, SECTION 7121(E)(2) DOES NOT PERTAIN TO AN
ADMONISHMENT GIVEN TO AN EMPLOYEE.