30:0020(5)AR - Oklahoma Air Logistics Center, Tinker AFB, OK and AFGE Local 916, Oklahoma City, OK -- 1987 FLRAdec AR



[ v30 p20 ]
30:0020(5)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


30 FLRA NO. 5
30 FLRA 20

10 NOV 1987


OKLAHOMA AIR LOGISTICS
CENTER, TINKER AIR FORCE
BASE, OKLAHOMA

                    Activity

      and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 916, OKLAHOMA CITY,
OKLAHOMA

                    Union

Case No. 0-AR-1419

DECISION

     I. Statement of the Case

     This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the
award of Arbitrator A. J. Carter 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. We deny the exceptions.

     II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

     The parties stipulated and submitted to arbitration the
issue of whether a 1-day suspension of the grievant for failure
to properly request leave was in accordance with the parties'
collective bargaining agreement. On threshold issues, the
Arbitrator ruled that the Agency was required to make available
all witnesses requested by the Union while noting that this
ruling was limited to this case. The Arbitrator rejected the
Union's objection to management exhibits offered to support its
position that the penalty imposed was consistent with prior cases
of a similar nature. On the merits, the Arbitrator denied the
grievance, finding that the suspension was in accordance with the
agreement.

     III. Discussion

     In its exceptions the Union contends that the award is
contrary to the collective bargaining agreement and Air Force
[PAGE] regulations on discipline, merit system principles, and
sick leave. The Union also contends that the Arbitrator made
numerous incorrect determinations; that the discipline was never
properly supported; that contrary to the Arbitrator's ruling, the
Activity did not make available all Union witnesses; and that the
Arbitrator erred by admitting the exhibits objected to by the
Union.

     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: specifically, 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 relations cases. See, for example,
Federal Correctional Institution, Petersburg, Virginia and
American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2052,
Petersburg, Virginia, 13 FLRA  108 (1983) (Exceptions which
attempted to relitigate the merits of the case before the
Authority provided no basis for finding the award deficient; the
exceptions constituted nothing more than disagreement with the
arbitrator's findings of fact,