27:0407(57)AR - Navy Public Works Center, San Diego, CA and NAGE Local R12-35 -- 1987 FLRAdec AR



[ v27 p407 ]
27:0407(57)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 27 FLRA No. 57
 
 NAVY PUBLIC WORKS CENTER, 
 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
 Activity
 
 and
 
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF 
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, 
 LOCAL R12-35
 Union
 
                                            Case No. 0-AR-1330
 
                        ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS
 
    This case is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator William S. Rule filed on behalf of the Activity pursuant to
 section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute and section 2425.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
 For the reason stated below, it has been determined that the exceptions
 must be dismissed as interlocutory.
 
    The record indicates that the Arbitrator determined that the issues
 to be resolved were (1) whether the grievance was arbitrable;  (2) If
 so, whether the Activity violated the parties' collective bargaining
 agreement by failing to properly maintain overtime charts and post them
 in all work centers during a specified period of time and (3) If so,
 what is the appropriate remedy?  The Arbitrator found that the grievance
 was arbitrable and that the Activity's conduct violated the parties'
 agreement.  However, the Arbitrator expressly declined to make a
 complete and definitive award as to the appropriate remedy because the
 record was apparently incomplete.  In this respect, the Arbitrator
 provided instructions to the parties and ordered them to enter into a
 series of meetings to settle the disputed overtime claims.  If the
 parties could not reach agreement, they were directed to resubmit the
 dispute to the Arbitrator by written brief unless the parties or the
 Arbitrator decided a hearing or hearings would be more appropriate.
 Further, the Arbitrator directed the parties, upon narrowing the number
 of overtime claimants, to attempt to agree on a monetary settlement
 because he considered a monetary award the only appropriate remedy.
 Finally, the Arbitrator retained jurisdiction for ninety (90) days and
 such additional periods of time as may be necessary to see that all
 claims pending are finally resolved.
 
    Section 2429.11 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations provides:
 "The Authority . . . ordinarily will not consider interlocutory
 appeals." That is, the Authority ordinarily will not consider an appeal
 until a final decision has been rendered on the entire proceeding.
 
    In this case, it is clear that the Arbitrator has not yet rendered a
 final award on the entire dispute in this case.  Rather, the record
 shows that the Arbitrator issued an interim award regarding two of the
 issues before him, i.e., whether the matter was arbitrable and whet