50:0279(48)AR - - AFGE, Local 1931 and Navy, Naval Weapons Station, Concord, CA - - 1995 FLRAdec AR - - v50 p279



[ v50 p279 ]
50:0279(48)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


50 FLRA No. 48

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

_____

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 1931

(Union)

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL WEAPONS STATION

CONCORD, CALIFORNIA

(Agency)

0-AR-2656

_____

DECISION

March 29, 1995

_____

Before the Authority: Phyllis N. Segal, Chair; Tony Armendariz and Pamela Talkin, Members.

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Charles A. Askin 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 Regulations. The Agency did not file an opposition to the Union's exceptions.

The Arbitrator found that a grievance, which challenged the Agency's refusal to consider the grievant for a vacant position, was not arbitrable.

For the following reasons, we find that the Union has not established that the award is deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute. Accordingly, we deny the exceptions.

II. Arbitrator's Award

After the grievant was transferred from the Agency to another, separate, agency within the Federal Government, he applied for a vacant position with the Agency. The Agency advised the grievant that he was ineligible for the position because consideration was limited to employees of the Agency.

The Arbitrator framed the issues as follows:

1) Is the grievance arbitrable?

2) Did the Employer violate provisions of the Contract, specifically Articles [sic] 4, Section 1; Article 7, Sections 1 and 3; Article 25, or any other provisions of the Contract, by denying [the grievant] the opportunity to be considered for the position of Material Handler Supervisor, WS-6907-07?

3) Did the Employer afford [the grievant] a fair and equitable opportunity to be considered for promotion as required by Federal law 5 U.S.C. 2301 and 2302?

4) If the answer is yes to either of the first two issues, what is the appropriate remedy?