26:0292(37)AR - SSA, Mid-America Program Service Center, and AFGE, Local 1336 -- 1987 FLRAdec AR



[ v26 p292 ]
26:0292(37)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 26 FLRA No. 37
 
 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 
 MID-AMERICA PROGRAM SERVICE CENTER
 Agency
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF 
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1336
 Union
 
                                            Case No. 0-AR-1218
 
                                 DECISION
 
                         I.  STATEMENT OF THE CASE
 
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator John R. Thornell filed by the Agency under section 7122(a) of
 the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425 of
 the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
 
                  II.  BACKGROUND AND ARBITRATOR'S AWARD
 
    A grievance was filed in this case by the Union on behalf of former
 employees of the Agency who had voluntarily resigned and who had
 subsequently applied to the Agency for reinstatement.  According to the
 Arbitrator, the grievance essentially claimed that the applications for
 reinstatement were not properly considered as required by Article 26,
 Section 5B.14, which pertinently provides that when a former employee
 applies for reinstatement and is eligible for consideration, the
 personnel office will determine the bargaining-unit position for which
 the individual can be considered and whether consideration must be
 competitive.  The grievance was not resolved and was submitted to
 arbitration on the issues of whether the grievance was arbitrable and
 whether the Agency violated the collective bargaining agreement.
 
    The Arbitrator first determined that the grievance pertained to a
 matter that was grievable and arbitrable and that the grievance was
 timely.  On the merits, the Arbitrator determined that the applications
 for reinstatement had been processed and considered as required by
 Article 26, Section 5B.14 of the collective bargaining agreement.
 Accordingly, as his award, the Arbitrator denied the grievance.
 
                             III.  EXCEPTIONS
 
    In its exceptions the Agency contends that by finding the grievance
 to be grievable and arbitrable, the award is contrary to the Statute.
 Specifically, the Agency argues that the grievance is not within the
 statutory definition of grievance set forth in section 7103(a)(9)
 because the individuals who applied for reinstatement are not employees
 as defined in section 7103(a)(2).  The Agency also argues that the
 grievance concerns a matter of appointment and that the grievance is
 therefore precluded by section 7121(c)(4).
 
                       IV.  ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
 
    We conclude that the Agency fails to establish that by finding the
 grievance to be grievable and arbitrable, the award is contr