31:1184(102)AR - Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow, CA and AFGE Local 1482 -- 1988 FLRAdec AR



[ v31 p1184 ]
31:1184(102)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


 31 FLRA NO. 102

MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE
BARSTOW, CALIFORNIA

                     Activity

         and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1482

                    Union

                                            Case No. 0-AR-1452

                        DECISION

     I. Statement of the Case

     This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the
award of Arbitrator William S. Rule filed by the Department of
the Navy (the Agency) on behalf of the Activity 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 Union filed an opposition.  */   The Agency excepts
to that part of the Arbitrator's award which states that the
grievant was entitled to overtime for work performed between
March 12, 1986 and October 30, 1986. For the reasons discussed
below, we conclude that the Agency has failed to establish that
this part of the award is contrary to law. Accordingly, we deny
the exception.

     II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

     The grievant worked as a sports specialist for the Activity
and was responsible for the sports programs. Occasionally, he
served as an official at athletic events held at the base. This
additional activity was not a part of his official duties as a
sports specialist. When engaged in this activity, he began
officiating at 5:00 p.m., 1/2 hour after the end of his workday
as a sports specialist. After being disciplined for matters
unrelated to the exception before us, he filed grievances which
alleged, among other things, that he was entitled to overtime for
22.5 hours worked between 4:30 and 5:00 p.m. for the period March
12, 1986 through October 30, 1986.

     The Arbitrator determined that the record was insufficient
to make an exact determination as to the specific overtime due
the grievant. He further found, based on the record, that: (1)
the grievant was entitled to overtime for work performed between
4:30 and 5:00 p.m. on September 19, 1986; and (2)  the grievant's
supervisor was fully aware that the grievant was working from
4:30 to 5:00 p.m. on those days he was to officiate a game at
5:00 p.m. The Arbitrator concluded that the grievant was entitled
to overtime for hours not exceeding the 22.5 hours claimed,
subject to the right of the Activity to show that the grievant
was not at work or did not officiate on any of the dates claimed
and to deduct those hours accordingly. The Arbitrator further
retained jurisdiction of this particular issue for 60 days to
resolve any dispute as to this aspect of the award.

     III. Positions of the Parties

     The Agency excepts to the award's grant of overtime pay to
t