26:0057(6)AR AFGE VS HHS, SSA -- 1987 FLRAdec AR
[ v26 p57 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
26 FLRA No. 6 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION Agency and NATIONAL COUNCIL OF SSA FIELD OPERATIONS LOCALS (NCSSAFOL) AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO (AFGE) Union Case No. 0-AR-1167 (25 FLRA No. 17)
This matter is before the Authority on a request filed by the Agency seeking reconsideration of a portion of the Authority's decision of January 20, 1987. In that decision we denied two of the Agency's three exceptions and all of the union's exceptions to the Arbitrator's interest arbitration award. With regard to the remaining Agency exception, we set aside that part of the award concerning Article 9, section 7.G.3., because the Arbitrator improperly resolved a negotiability dispute. The Agency is seeking reconsideration of the part of the decision which denied its exception which contended that the Arbitrator's award of union ratification rights was contrary to section 7119(c)(5)(B) of the Statute.
The agreement provision which the Arbitrator ordered and to which the Agency excepted reads as follows:
In the event the union fails to ratify the Supplemental Agreement, the parties will meet within 60 days to renegotiate those portions specified by the union.
We denied the Agency's exception that the award of this provision violated section 7119(c)(5)(B). We concluded that nothing in the Statute prohibits parties from including a provision for union ratification of an agreement before it becomes final. In its request for reconsideration of this decision, the Agency argues that extraordinary circumstances exist because there is a question as to whether the Federal Service Impasses Panel (the Panel) intended in this case to use interest arbitration to bring the impasse to a final conclusion. The Agency argues that because of this question, the Authority should solicit and consider the views of the Panel to determine whether the Arbitrator was authorized to impose a final resolution on the parties.
Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations permits a party that can establish "extraordinary circumstances" to request reconsideration of a decision of the Authority. Here, however, we conclude that the Agency has not established "extraordinary circumstances" within the meaning of section 2429.17. Rather, the arguments presented by the Agency in support of its request constitute nothing more than disagreement with the merits of the Authority's decision and an attempt to relitigate the matter.
Accordingly, the Agency's request for reconsideration is denied.
Issued, Washington, D.C., Mar