27:0130(24)AR - Defense Logistics Agency and AFGE Local 3953 -- 1987 FLRAdec AR



[ v27 p130 ]
27:0130(24)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 27 FLRA No. 24
 
 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
 Agency
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF 
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, 
 LOCAL 3953
 Union
 
                                            Case No. 0-AR-1303
 
                                 DECISION
 
    I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator Harold H. Schroeder filed by the Union under section 7122(a)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)
 and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.  The Agency
 filed an opposition.  /1/
 
    II.  Background and Arbitrator's Award
 
    According to the Arbitrator, the grievant had been tentatively
 selected for a promotion, but the selection action was cancelled due to
 budgetary constraints.  When he was notified that the position to which
 he was tentatively selected would not be filled, the grievant filed a
 grievance that was submitted to arbitration questioning whether
 management had just cause to deny the promotion to the grievant.  The
 Arbitrator found that no final selection had been made.  He also found
 that management's actions were not in violation of the parties'
 collective bargaining agreement and were not arbitrary or capricious.
 Consequently, he concluded that management had just cause to deny the
 promotion to the grievant, and as his award he denied the grievance.
 
    III.  Discussion
 
    The Union contends that the award is contrary to 5 C.F.R. Section
 335.103 and the Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) chapter 335, subchapter
 1-4, Requirement 1, which pertain to merit promotion.
 
    We conclude that the Union has failed to establish that the
 Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in
 section 7122(a) of the Statute;  that is, that the award is contrary to
 any law, rule or regulation, or that the award is deficient on other
 grounds similar to those applied by federal courts in private sector
 labor-management relations cases.  See, for example, Department of
 Defense, 375 Air Force Base Group, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois and
 National Association of Government Employees, Local R7-23, 5 FLRA 55
 (1981) (in which The Union failed to show that provisions of FPM chapter
 335, in the circumstances presented, required the remedy desired by the
 Union or that the award was in any manner contrary to those
 regulations).  Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied.  /2/
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., May 29, 1987.
                                       /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
                                       /s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       /s/ Jean McKee, Member