U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Atlanta Customer Service Center, Atlanta, Georgia (Agency) and National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 284 (Union)

[ v57 p2 ]

57 FLRA No. 2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
ATLANTA CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
(Agency)

and

NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES
UNION, CHAPTER 284
(Union)

0-AR-3387

_____

DECISION

March 12, 2001

_____

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

      This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator William P. Murphy filed by the Agency under § 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Regulations. The Union filed an opposition to the Agency's exceptions.

      Under § 7122(a) of the Statute, an award is deficient if it is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation; or it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. Upon careful consideration of the entire record in this case, and Authority precedent, the Authority concludes that the award is not deficient on the grounds raised in the exceptions and set forth in § 7122(a). See United States Dep't of Labor (OSHA), 34 FLRA 573, 575 (1990) (award not deficient as failing to draw its essence from the parties' collective bargaining agreement where excepting party fails to establish that the award cannot in any rational way be derived from the agreement; is so unfounded in reason and fact and so unconnected to the wording and purpose of the agreement as to manifest an infidelity to the obligation of the arbitrator; does not represent a plausible interpretation of the agreement; or cannot in any rational way be derived from the agreement or evidences a manifest disregard of the agreement); United States Dep't of the Air Force, Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colo., 48 FLRA 589, 593-94 (1993) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party either challenges a factual matter that the parties disputed at arbitration or fails to demonstrate that the central fact underlying the award is clearly erroneous, but for which a different result would have been reached by the arbitrator).

      Accordingly, the Agency's exceptions are denied.


<