15:0189(30)AR - AFGE Local 2600 and GSA Region 10 -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v15 p189 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 30 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2600 Union and GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, REGION 10 Activity Case No. O-AR-491 DECISION This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator John H. Abernathy 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. /1/ The grievance in this matter was filed in May 1981 under the parties' collective bargaining agreement, which had been negotiated under provisions of Executive Order No. 11491 (the Order), claiming a violation of the agreement and a violation of section 7116(a)(5) and (8) of the Statute by the Activity in its denial of official time. The grievance was submitted to arbitration and heard by the Arbitrator in November 1982 at which time the Arbitrator noted two significant events: the execution of a new collective bargaining agreement by the Agency and Union in May 1982 and the signing by the Agency and Union of a memorandum of understanding in September 1982 respecting the processing of grievances filed prior to the new collective bargaining agreement. The Arbitrator also noted the argument of the Activity that the grievance was not arbitrable to the extent it claimed a violation of the Statute. It was the Activity's position that the grievance procedure of the parties' collective bargaining agreement negotiated under the Order applied in this case and the scope of that procedure was limited to the interpretation and application of that agreement. As his award the Arbitrator determined that the Activity had not violated the agreement. He further essentially determined in agreement with the Activity that the grievance procedure of the parties' agreement negotiated under the Order applied and that the Union's allegation of a violation of the Statute was not covered by that procedure and was accordingly not arbitrable. In its first exception the Union contends that the award is deficient to the extent that the Arbitrator found the grievance not to be arbitrable. The Union argues that the intent of the parties in the memorandum of understanding was to bring all pending grievances under the broad-scope of the Statute. This exception, however, merely constitutes disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation and application of the collective agreement of the parties to find otherwise and consequently provides no basis for finding the award deficient. See Letterkenny Army Depot and National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1429, 5 FLRA 272 (1981). In its second exception the Union contends that the award to the extent that the grievance was found not to be arbitrable is contrary to section 7121 of the Statute. In support the Union again argues that the grievance procedure of the collective bargaining agreement negotiated under the Statute applied and that consequently the award imposes a reduction in the scope of that procedure in violation of section 7121. The Authority concludes that this exception fails to establish that the award is contrary to the Statute. As has been noted, the Arbitrator ruled that the grievance procedure negotiated under the Order and not the procedure negotiated under the Statute applied to this matter. In these circumstances the Authority has expressly determined that no provision of the Statute would make an otherwise nonarbitrable matter subject to arbitration. Veterans Administration Hospital, Muskogee, Oklahoma and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2250, 12 FLRA No. 90 (1983). Accordingly, the exceptions are denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., June 27, 1984 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ The Activity filed an opposition which was untimely and has not been considered.