13:0343(56)AR - AFGE Local 1858 and Army Missile Command, Missile and Munitions Center and School, Redstone Arsenal, AL -- 1983 FLRAdec AR



[ v13 p343 ]
13:0343(56)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 13 FLRA No. 56
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1858, AFL-CIO
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 U.S. ARMY MISSILE COMMAND, MISSILE
 AND MUNITIONS CENTER AND SCHOOL,
 REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALABAMA
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. O-AR-277
 
                                 DECISION
 
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator Sherman Dallas 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 Activity's change in the tour
 of duty for certain instructors and support personnel.  The issue before
 the Arbitrator was whether the Activity violated the provision in the
 parties' collective bargaining agreement pertaining to tour of duty
 changes, which prohibits such changes if "continuation of the regular
 tour of duty would not seriously handicap the performance of a function
 or would not result in substantially increased cost." The Arbitrator
 concluded that continuation of the former tour of duty would have
 seriously handicapped the performance of the teaching function at the
 Activity's school.  Accordingly, as his award, the Arbitrator denied the
 grievance.
 
    In its exceptions, the Union essentially alleges that the award is
 contrary to law and the parties' agreement because it is based on the
 Arbitrator's misinterpretation and misapplication of the cited provision
 in the agreement.  The Union maintains that by agreeing to the provision
 the Activity gave up its right to change tours of duty without
 negotiating with the Union.
 
    Upon careful consideration of the entire record before the Authority,
 including the contentions of the parties, the Authority concludes that
 the Union has failed to establish that the award is deficient.  It is
 clear that the Union is attempting to relitigate the merits of the case
 before the Authority since the Union's exceptions and supporting
 contentions essentially constitute disagreement with the Arbitrator's
 conclusion that the tour of duty change was not violative of the
 parties' agreement.  It is well-established that disagreement with an
 arbitrator's interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement does
 not provide a basis for finding an award deficient under the Statute.
 E.g., American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1210 and
 Immigration and Naturalization Service, 8 FLRA No. 17 (1982).
 
    Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied.  Issued, Washington,
 D.C., November 1, 1983