At this time FLRA remains fully operational. Effective Friday July 31, 2020, the agency now extends the prohibition on in-person filings indefinitely.  

See details: here.

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

13:0405(67)AR - HQ, Fort Monroe, Fort Monroe, Virginia and NAGE Local R4-11 -- 1983 FLRAdec AR

[ v13 p405 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:

 13 FLRA No. 67
 LOCAL R4-11
                                            Case No. O-AR-537
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator Harold D. Jones, Jr., filed on behalf of the Union under
 section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
    The dispute in this matter concerns the Activity's suspension of the
 grievant for two days for discourteous and demeaning behavior.  The
 Arbitrator determined, in pertinent part, that the two day suspension
 was for just and sufficient cause.
    In its exceptions, the Union contends that the Arbitrator's award is
 contrary to law, rule or regulation in that the Arbitrator failed to
 apply the burden of proof assertedly required by 5 U.S.C. 7121(e)(2) and
 7701(c)(1), and that the award is contrary to the evidence.
    Upon careful consideration of the entire record before the Authority,
 the Authority concludes that the Union has failed to establish that the
 award is deficient.  In this regard, under 5 U.S.C. 7121(e)(2), in
 certain matters an arbitrator is governed by the standards set forth in
 5 U.S.C. 7701(c)(1).  However, Sec. 7121(e)(2) does not apply herein
 since it does not pertain to suspensions for 14 days or less.  E.g.,
 Naval Weapons Station, Yorktown, Virginia and National Association of
 Government Employees, Local R4-96, 13 FLRA No. 32 (1983).
    As to the Union's contention that the award is contrary to the
 evidence, it is clear that the Union is attempting to relitigate the
 merits of the case before the Authority since the Union's contention
 constitutes nothing more than disagreement with the Arbitrator's
 findings of fact and with his reasoning and conclusions based on the
 evidence and testimony before him.  It is well-established that such an
 assertion provides no basis for finding an award deficient.  E.g.,
 American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923, AFL-CIO and
 Social Security Administration, 7 FLRA No. 15 (1981);  American
 Federation of Government Employees, Council 236 and General Services
 Administration, National Capital Region, 12 FLRA No. 53 (1983).
    Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied.  Issued, Washington,
 D.C., November 17, 1983.
                                       Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY