30:1204(133)AR - AFGE Local 916 and Tinker AFB, AFLC -- 1988 FLRAdec AR
[ v30 p1204 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
30 FLRA NO. 133 30 FLRA 1204 29 JAN 1988 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 916 Union and TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, AFLC Activity Case No. O-AR-1438 DECISION I. Statement of the Case This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Barnett M. Goodstein. The Arbitrator determined that the Activity's reprimand of the grievant for loafing on duty was too severe, but that discipline was warranted. He directed that the reprimand be replaced with an oral admonishment. The Union filed exceptions 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 conclude that the Union has not established that the Arbitrator's award is contrary to the U.S. Constitution, agency regulations, or the parties' collective bargaining agreement, or that the Arbitrator made incorrect findings and failed to conduct a fair hearing. Accordingly, we deny the exceptions. II. Background and Arbitrator's Award The grievant was reprimanded for loafing on duty. Arbitration was invoked on the issue of whether the reprimand was in accordance with applicable law and regulation and the spirit and intent of the collective bargaining agreement and was for just cause. Based on the evidence presented, the Arbitrator determined that the grievant had been loafing on the job as, charged and that discipline was warranted. He concluded that a reprimand was too severe but that just cause existed to orally admonish the grievant. Accordingly, he directed that the reprimand be replaced by an oral admonishment. III. Discussion The Union contends that the award is contrary to the U.S. Constitution and that the Arbitrator failed to conduct a fair hearing because the Arbitrator was not impartial, denied the grievant his right to due process and to confront witnesses against him, and refused to compel the Activity to make witnesses requested by the Union available. The Union also contends that the Arbitrator and management violated the agreement and agency regulations and that the Arbitrator made incorrect findings. We conclude that the Union has not established that the Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122(a) of the Statute. Specifically, the Union has failed to establish 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 the Federal courts in private sector labor relations cases. The Union is simply attempting to relitigate this case before us. See, for example, Oklahoma Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma and America Federation of Government Employees, Local 916, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 30 FLRA 20 (1987) (exceptions which attempt to relitigate the merits of the case before the Authority and which constitute nothing more than disagreement with the arbitrator's findings of fact, evaluation of the evidence and testimony, interpretation and application of the collective bargaining agreement, and conduct of the hearing, provide no basis for finding an award deficient). IV. Decision The Union's exceptions are denied. Issued, Washington, D.C.