15:0189(30)AR - AFGE Local 2600 and GSA Region 10 -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v15 p189 ]
15:0189(30)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 30
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2600
Union
and
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
REGION 10
Activity
Case No. O-AR-491
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
Arbitrator John H. Abernathy filed by the Union under section 7122(a) of
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425 of
the Authority's Rules and Regulations. /1/
The grievance in this matter was filed in May 1981 under the parties'
collective bargaining agreement, which had been negotiated under
provisions of Executive Order No. 11491 (the Order), claiming a
violation of the agreement and a violation of section 7116(a)(5) and (8)
of the Statute by the Activity in its denial of official time. The
grievance was submitted to arbitration and heard by the Arbitrator in
November 1982 at which time the Arbitrator noted two significant events:
the execution of a new collective bargaining agreement by the Agency
and Union in May 1982 and the signing by the Agency and Union of a
memorandum of understanding in September 1982 respecting the processing
of grievances filed prior to the new collective bargaining agreement.
The Arbitrator also noted the argument of the Activity that the
grievance was not arbitrable to the extent it claimed a violation of the
Statute. It was the Activity's position that the grievance procedure of
the parties' collective bargaining agreement negotiated under the Order
applied in this case and the scope of that procedure was limited to the
interpretation and application of that agreement. As his award the
Arbitrator determined that the Activity had not violated the agreement.
He further essentially determined in agreement with the Activity that
the grievance procedure of the parties' agreement negotiated under the
Order applied and that the Union's allegation of a violation of the
Statute was not covered by that procedure and was accordingly not
arbitrable.
In its first exception the Union contends that the award is deficient
to the extent that the Arbitrator found the grievance not to be
arbitrable. The Union argues that the intent of the parties in the
memorandum of understanding was to bring all pending grievances under
the broad-scope of the Statute. This exception, however, merely
constitutes disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation and
application of the collective agreement of the parties to find otherwise
and consequently provides no basis for finding the award deficient. See
Letterkenny Army Depot and National Federation of Federal Employees,
Local 1429, 5 FLRA 272 (1981).
In its second exception the Union contends that the award to the
extent that the grievance was found not to be arbitrable is contrary to
section 7121 of the Statute. In support the Union again argues that the
grievance procedure of the collective bargaining agreement negotiated
under the Statute applied and that consequently the award imposes a
reduction in the scope of that procedure in violation of section 7121.
The Authority concludes that this exception fails to establish that
the award is contrary to the Statute. As has been noted, the Arbitrator
ruled that the grievance procedure negotiated under the Order and not
the procedure negotiated under the Statute applied to this matter. In
these circumstances the Authority has expressly determined that no
provision of the Statute would make an otherwise nonarbitrable matter
subject to arbitration. Veterans Administration Hospital, Muskogee,
Oklahoma and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2250, 12
FLRA No. 90 (1983).
Accordingly, the exceptions are denied.
Issued, Washington, D.C., June 27, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ The Activity filed an opposition which was untimely and has not
been considered.