26:0781(91)AR - HHS, SSA, and AFGE -- 1987 FLRAdec AR



[ v26 p781 ]
26:0781(91)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 26 FLRA No. 91
 
 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 Agency
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
 Union
 
                                            Case No. 0-AR-1213
                                            (26 FLRA No. 3)
 
                 ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
 
    This matter is before the Authority on a request filed by the Agency
 seeking reconsideration of our decision of March 4, 1987, denying the
 Agency's exceptions to the Arbitrator's award.  The Agency also filed a
 request for a stay of our decision.
 
    In our decision, after careful consideration of the record, we
 determined that the Agency had failed to establish that the Arbitrator's
 award was deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122(a)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.  Accordingly,
 we denied the Agency's exceptions.
 
    In support of its request for reconsideration, the Agency argues that
 the decision involves issues which fall within the purview of the
 Petition for Review filed by the Agency with the United States Court of
 Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in another case, American Federation of
 Government Employees and Social Security Administration, 25 FLRA No. 12
 (1986), request for reconsideration denied, 25 FLRA No. 32 (February 3,
 1987), petition for review dismissed sub nom. Department of Health and
 Human Services, Social Security Administration v. FLRA, No. 87-3808 (4th
 Cir. April 21, 1987).  The Agency asserts that:  (1) the decision of the
 Fourth Circuit should dispose of the central issues underlying the
 exceptions in this case;  (2) granting the request for reconsideration
 would eliminate simultaneous litigation through the unfair labor
 practice process for enforcement or compliance with the Authority's
 decision;  and (3) granting the request for reconsideration would
 eliminate the need to file a Petition for Review with the Fourth Circuit
 in this case.  The Agency requests that we reconsider our decision and
 hold the matter in abeyance pending the outcome of its appeal to the
 Fourth Circuit.
 
    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 essentially
 constitute nothing more than disagreement with the merits of our
 decision.  Moreover, as indicated above, the Fourth Circuit dismissed
 the Agency's Petition for Review on April 21, 1