13:0677(109)AR - Labor, Labor-Management Services Administration, Cleveland, OH and National Union of Compliance Officers -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v13 p677 ]
13:0677(109)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
13 FLRA No. 109
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
LABOR-MANAGEMENT SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, CLEVELAND, OHIO
(Agency)
and
NATIONAL UNION OF COMPLIANCE OFFICERS
(Union)
Case No. O-AR-511
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of
Arbitrator Jonathan Dworkin filed by the Agency under section 7122(a) of
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations and part 2425 of the
Authority's Rules and Regulations.
The dispute in this matter concerned the termination of the
grievant's employment during her probationary period. The Arbitrator
determined that the termination action was arbitrable on its merits
under the parties' collective bargaining agreement and sustained the
Union's grievance requesting reinstatement of the grievant. In its
exceptions, as supplemented, the Agency in effect contends that the
award is contrary to law as set forth in the decision of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Department of
Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Federal Labor
Relations Authority, 709 F.2d 724 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
Upon careful consideration of the entire record before the Authority,
including the contentions of the parties, the Authority finds that the
Arbitrator's award is contrary to law.
In the Immigration and Naturalization Service case, the court held
that a proposal whereby the termination of probationary employees would
be grievable under the parties' collective bargaining agreement /1/ was
inconsistent with law and regulations. Id. at 730 n.23. In reversing
the Authority's determination that the proposal was negotiable, the
court concluded, at 730:
Congress has long recognized both that federal employees are
due certain procedural protections and that federal agencies must
be able to terminate employees for unacceptable work performance
or conduct. In accommodating these competing concerns, Congress
created the concept of the probationary term and authorized
agencies to terminate employees summarily during this period. It
saw summary terminations as essential to an effective and
efficient service, and it has repeatedly acted to preserve the
agencies' discretion summarily to remove probationary employees.
We detect no retreat from this position in the Civil Service
Reform Act of 1978 or in the OPM regulations that implement the
congressional mandate. Accordingly, we find the union proposal to
be inconsistent with other law, and we reverse FLRA's order that
INS bargain over the proposal. (Footnote omitted).
Thus, the court held with respect to termination of probationary
employees for unacceptable work performance or conduct that the
discretion of agencies to terminate probationers summarily for such
reasons was not altered by the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act
of 1978. While in this case the grievance concerned the termination of
a probationer for conditions arising before appointment (5 C.F.R.
315.805), the Authority nevertheless views the court's considerations in
the Immigration and Naturalization Service case as applicable here.
Accordingly, the Authority finds that in enacting the Federal Service
Labor-Management Relations Statute Congress did not intend grievance and
arbitration procedures negotiated under the Statute to cover grievances
concerning the termination of probationary employees such as that at
issue in this case. To the extent that previous decisions of the
Authority are to the contrary, they will no longer be followed.
Therefore, the Arbitrator's award in the instant case, finding the
Union's grievance arbitrable, must be set aside as contrary to law.
Accordingly, the award is hereby set aside.
Issued, Washington, D.C., January 16, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY