15:0328(69)AR - GSA and AFGE Council 236 -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v15 p328 ]
15:0328(69)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 69
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Agency
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 236
Union
Case No. O-AR-667
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
Arbitrator Roger P. Kaplan filed by the Agency 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 concerned the Agency's conduct toward the
Union's designated representative, a former employee of the Agency who
had been removed from employment for disorderly conduct while acting as
a Union official. The dispute arose when the Agency refused to allow
the individual, now a non-employee national union representative, access
to the Agency's premises, and refused to deal with him in this capacity.
The Arbitrator found that the Agency violated the parties' collective
bargaining agreement by not permitting the representative reasonable
access to unit employees and by not recognizing him as a representative.
The Arbitrator therefore directed the Agency to recognize the
individual as a union representative and permit him to have access to
unit employees. The Arbitrator noted, however, that he did not condone
the individual's prior misconduct and added an admonishment that as a
Union representative the individual had a responsibility to act in
accordance with accepted labor relations practices and could not act
with impunity.
In its exceptions, the Agency argues that the Arbitrator erred in
concluding that the Agency violated the parties' agreement by not
permitting the Union representative access to Agency employees; that
the Arbitrator's rejection of the Agency's justification for not dealing
with the Union representative was contrary to law, arbitrary,
contradictory and otherwise faulty; and that the Arbitrator's finding
that the Agency violated the parties' agreement by not recognizing the
Union representative was beyond the Arbitrator's authority, was based on
a nonfact, and did not draw its essence from the parties' agreement.
Upon consideration of the entire record before the Authority, the
Authority concludes that the Agency has failed to establish that the
Arbitrator's award is in any way deficient. It is clear that the Agency
is merely attempting to relitigate the merits of the case before the
Authority and that the thrust of the Agency's assertions essentially
constitutes nothing more than disagreement with the Arbitrator's
findings of fact, his specific reasoning and conclusions, and generally
with his interpretation and application of the parties' agreement.
Consequently, the exceptions do not provide any basis for finding the
award deficient. See Federal Correctional Institution, Petersburg,
Virginia and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 2052, 13
FLRA No. 27 (1984).
Accordingly, the Agency's exceptions are denied. /1/
Issued, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ In denying the exceptions, the Authority emphasizes that such
denial shall not be construed as condonation of the Union
representative's past misconduct and also endorses the Arbitrator's
admonishment that the representative cannot act "with impunity." See
Harry S. Truman Memorial Veterans Hospital, Columbia, Missouri and
American Federation of Government Employees (AFL-CIO), Local No. 3399,
14 FLRA No. 20 (1984).