35:0824(87)AR - - Army, Army Reserve Personnel Center, St. Louis, MO and AFGE Local 900 - - 1990 FLRAdec AR - - v35 p824



[ v35 p824 ]
35:0824(87)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


35 FLRA No. 87

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ARMY RESERVE PERSONNEL CENTER

ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI

(Agency)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 900

(Union)

0-AR-1797

ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS

April 27, 1990

Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Gerard A. Fowler. The Arbitrator denied the grievance over the grievant's removal.

The Union filed exceptions to the award 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 Agency filed a Motion to Dismiss the exceptions.

For the reasons stated below, we are without jurisdiction under section 7122(a) of the Statute to review the Union's exceptions.

II. Background and Arbitrator's Award

The Agency removed the grievant from his position on the following grounds: (1) violation of the Agency's policy prohibiting sexual harassment, (2) absence without leave (AWOL) on August 2, 1988, (3) insubordination on September 21, 1988, for refusing to help his supervisor perform a task and leaving the work area, and (4) failure to follow instructions in a timely manner.

The grievant filed a grievance contesting his removal, and the grievance was submitted to arbitration. The Arbitrator determined that the Agency's charges against the grievant were valid and rejected the Union's request that the penalty be reduced. Accordingly, the Arbitrator denied the grievance.

III. Positions of the Parties

A. Union's Exceptions

The Union asserts that the Agency failed to prove that the grievant was unsuitable for employment. Additionally, the Union notes that the grievant was "harassed, followed and denied in connection with his medical treatment" for injuries sustained in military service. Exceptions at 1. The Union also asserts that the Arbitrator "failed to remain impartial and unbiased." Id. at 2.

B. Agency's Motion to Dismiss

The Agency asserts that the exceptions must be dismissed because the award involves a removal action under 5 U.S.C. § 7512.

IV. Discussion