32:1075(147)AR - - NTEU, Chapter 202 and Treasury, Financial Management Service, HQ Office - - 1988 FLRAdec AR - - v32 p1075
[ v32 p1075 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
32 FLRA No. 147
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES
UNION, CHAPTER 202
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
Case No. 0-AR-1545
ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS
I. Statement of the Case
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator M. David Vaughn. The Arbitrator mitigated the grievant's removal to a 30-day suspension contingent upon the grievant's agreement to several conditions.
The Agency 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. The Union filed an opposition.
Because the Arbitrator's award concerns the removal of the grievant from the Federal service, we are without jurisdiction to review the Agency's exceptions.
II. Background and Arbitrator's Award
The Activity removed the grievant for (1) consuming alcoholic beverages on duty and (2) operating a Government vehicle without authorization resulting in its damage. A grievance was filed challenging the removal. The grievance was not resolved and was submitted to arbitration.
The Arbitrator found that the Activity had not proved the charge that the grievant consumed alcoholic beverages on duty. The Arbitrator found that the Activity had proved that the grievant operated a Government vehicle without authorization and damaged the vehicle. The Arbitrator concluded that an appropriate penalty for unauthorized use of and damage to the Government vehicle was a 30-day suspension. However, the Arbitrator conditioned the grievant's reinstatement with backpay on the grievant's agreement to obtain a medical and/or psychological evaluation relating to his use of alcohol. The Arbitrator set forth additional conditions to the grievant's reinstatement if the results of the evaluations indicated that the grievant is, or probably is, an alcoholic, alcohol-dependent, or alcohol-abusing.
III. Positions of the Parties
The Agency contends that the award (1) violates law, (2) exceeds the Arbitrator's authority, (3) does not draw its essence from the Arbitrator's findings of fact, and (4) fails to completely apply the factors which must be considered in determining the appropriateness of the penalty.
The Union contends that the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Agency's exceptions.