12:0513(97)AR - Federal Election Commission and NTEU Chapter 204 -- 1983 FLRAdec AR
[ v12 p513 ]
12:0513(97)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
12 FLRA No. 97
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Agency
and
NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION,
CHAPTER 204
Union
Case No. O-AR-309
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
Arbitrator Seymour Strongin 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 Rules and Regulations. The Agency filed an
opposition.
The parties by stipulation submitted to arbitration the following
issue:
Did the Agency violate the provisions of Article XIV, Section
14B(2) /1/ in failing to promote (the grievant) on or about his
anniversary date? In other words, whether or not the employee
demonstrated the ability to perform at the next highest grade.
(Footnote added.)
The Arbitrator essentially determined that there was no basis to find
that the Activity had violated the agreement, and accordingly as his
award he denied the grievance.
In its first exception the Union contends that the Arbitrator
exceeded his authority by substituting the issue of whether the Agency's
denial of the grievant's promotion was arbitrary, capricious, or
inherently unfair or discriminatory for the issue stipulated by the
parties.
The Authority concludes that the Union has not established that the
Arbitrator exceeded his authority. As noted the parties stipulated the
issue for decision to be whether in denying the grievant's career ladder
promotion, the Activity violated Article XIV, Section 148(2) of the
agreement. Contrary to the assertion of the Union, the Authority finds
that the Arbitrator, in determining that there was no basis on which to
find a violation of the agreement, resolved precisely the issue
stipulated by the parties. See Social Security Administration and
American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local No. 1923, 5
FLRA No. 33 (1981). In contending that the Arbitrator substituted the
issue of whether the Agency's action was arbitrary, capricious, unfair,
or discriminatory, the Union is merely disagreeing with the Arbitrator's
reasoning and conclusions to find that the Activity had not violated the
agreement, and such contentions provide no basis for finding the award
deficient. See, e.g., Community Services Administration and National
Council of CSA Locals, American Federation of Government Employees,
AFL-CIO, 5 FLRA No. 32 (1981).
In its second exception, the Union contends that the award does not
draw its essence from the parties' agreement. However, this exception
represents an attempt by the Union to have its own interpretation of the
agreement substituted for that of the Arbitrator, and consequently this
exception merely constitutes disagreement with the Arbitrator's
interpretation and application of the agreement provision before him.
Therefore, no basis is provided for finding that the award does not draw
its essence from the agreement. See Department of Health and Human
Services, Social Security Administration, Louisville, Kentucky District
and National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1790, 10 FLRA No. 73
(1982).
Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied. Issued, Washington,
D.C., August 10, 1983
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ Article XIV, Section 14B(2) of the parties' collective bargaining
agreement pertinently provides:
(B) Career ladder promotions are not automatic. However, if
there is enough work at the next higher grade level to be
performed, an employee has a non-discretionary right to be
promoted when the following conditions are met:
. . . .
(2) He/She has demonstrated the ability to perform at the next
higher level.