American Federation of Government Employees, Local 48 (Union) and United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Olympic Peninsula Agency, Aberdeen, Washington (Agency)

[ v56 p1082 ]

56 FLRA No. 191

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 48
(Union)

and

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
OLYMPIC PENINSULA AGENCY
ABERDEEN, WASHINGTON
(Agency)

0-AR-3313

_____

DECISION

January 31, 2001

_____

Before the Authority: Donald S. Wasserman, Chairman; Dale Cabaniss and Carol Waller Pope, Members.

Decision by Member Pope for the Authority.

I.     Statement of the Case

      This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Luella E. Nelson 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 filed an opposition to the Union's exceptions.

      The Arbitrator found that the Agency committed unwarranted and unjustified personnel actions when it denied the grievant a within grade increase (WIGI) and career ladder promotion based on improper performance standards. The Arbitrator ordered the Agency to determine the grievant's eligibility for the WIGI and promotion using proper performance standards and to apply its determinations retroactively. For the following reasons, we deny the Union's exceptions.

II.     Background and Arbitrator's Award

      Prior to receiving the grievant's performance rating, the Agency's personnel office approved him for a WIGI. Subsequently, the personnel office received the grievant's performance rating showing that his performance was below an acceptable level of competence. Based on this rating, the grievant's WIGI was denied and the grievant was not considered for a career ladder promotion. The Agency later discovered that the grievant's performance rating was invalid because the absolute standards used to rate the grievant had been previously invalidated by the Merit Systems Protection Board. Consequently, the Agency cancelled the performance rating, but did not retract the WIGI denial.

      The grievant filed a grievance that, when not resolved, was submitted to arbit