27:0872(96)AR AFGE, LOCAL 916 VS AIR FORCE, AIR FORCE BASE, TINK -- 1987 FLRAdec AR
[ v27 p872 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
27 FLRA NO. 96
TINKER AIR FORCE BASE Activity and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LOCAL 916 Union Case No. O-AR-1355
I. Statement of the Case
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of J. Earl Williams 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.
II. Background and Arbitrator's Award
The grievant was placed on temporary medically restricted duty as a result of inhalation of paint fumes on his job. During a part of this period, he was placed on enforced leave and as a result used 4 days of sick leave. A grievance was filed and submitted to arbitration requesting reinstatement of the sick leave.
The Arbitrator denied the grievance and found that the Union was unable to identify a single job which was available during the period in dispute and which could have been performed by the grievant consistent with his restrictions. The Arbitrator rejected the Union's contention that the Activity had violated the local supplement to Air Force Regulation (AFR) 40-716 by failing to maintain a list of temporary vacancies suitable for employees on restricted duty or to form a labor pool for the day-to-day staffing of such activities. The Arbitrator found the Activity to be in compliance with the regulation. He noted that a book containing the names of all employees on medically restricted duty formed the labor pool for the day-to-day staffing and that while there was no written list of temporary vacancies, certain vacancies were known by all to be generally available for medically restricted employees.
III. Discussion and Conclusion
The Union contends that the award is deficient because the Arbitrator's determination that the Activity complied with AFR 40-716 is contrary to that regulation.
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. S