15:0862(163)AR - Justice, INS and National INS Council, AFGE Local 2805 -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v15 p862 ]
15:0862(163)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 163
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE
Agency
and
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE COUNCIL,
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2805
Union
Case No. O-AR-427
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
Arbitrator Edgar A. Jones, Jr. 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 concerns the alleged detail of the
grievant to a higher-grade position. A grievance was filed and the
matter was ultimately submitted to arbitration. The Arbitrator
essentially determined that the grievant had been detailed to perform
substantially all the duties of a higher-grade position for an extended
period of time for which she was entitled under the parties' collective
bargaining agreement to have been compensated at the higher rate of pay
from the first day of the detail. Accordingly, he awarded her backpay
for the period of the detail in the amount of the difference in what she
was paid and what she should have been paid.
In its first and second exceptions the Agency contends that the award
is contrary to law and regulation and is based on a nonfact. However,
in American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923 and Social
Security Administration, Headquarters, Bureaus and Offices, 12 FLRA No.
96 (1983), the Authority expressly denied such exceptions to an
arbitration award which, as in this case, essentially determined that an
employee performed the duties of a higher-grade position for a period of
time which entitled the employee under the parties' collective
bargaining agreement to have been temporarily promoted to the
higher-grade position and awarding the grievant backpay for the
Activity's failure to do so in violation of the agreement. The
Authority concluded that the agency's exceptions that such award was
contrary to law, rules or regulation and was based on a nonfact
constituted nothing more than disagreement with the arbitrator's
interpretation and application of the parties' agreement. The Agency's
first and second exceptions in this case , likewise constitute
disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation and application of the
parties' collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, they provide no
basis for finding the award deficient and are denied. See also American
Federation of Government Employees, Local 148, Council of Prison Locals
and Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, 7
FLRA 95 (1981).
In its third exception the Agency contends that the award is
deficient because the Arbitrator was without jurisdiction in this matter
under section 7121(c)(5) of the Statute which excludes from grievance
and arbitration most grievances concerning the classification of any
position. However, the grievance in this case pertains to whether the
grievant was entitled to have been compensated at a higher-rate of pay
during the period of an asserted detail and does not directly concern
the classification of any position, and accordingly this exception is
denied. See U.S. Army Missile Readiness Command and American Federation
of Government Employees, Local 1858, 15 FLRA No. 64 (1984); U.S.
Department of Labor and American Federation of Government Employees,
Local 641, 5 FLRA 60 (1981).
In its fourth exception the Agency essentially contends that the
award is contrary to the order in Wilson v. U.S., No. 324-81C (Ct. of
Cl. Oct. 23, 1981). The Authority concludes that the Agency fails to
establish in what manner the award is contrary to the order of the court
in Wilson. The court in Wilson held that the statutory and FPM
provisions limiting details to 120 days contain no language authorizing
either a constructive promotion to or the pay of the position to which
detailed when the detail is to a higher-grade position and exceeds the
permissible duration. It has not been shown that the order of the court
in Wilson precludes an arbitrator from awarding backpay to remedy a
violation of a provision of a collective bargaining agreement that has
resulted in a reduction of an aggrieved employee's pay, allowances, or
differentials. See 5 U.S.C. 5596; Veterans Administration Hospital and
American Federation of Government Employees, Lodge 2201, 4 FLRA 419
(1980); accord 61 Comp.Gen. 403 (1982). Accordingly, this exception is
denied.
In its exceptions, the Agency has also contended that the award is
deficient as to the date on which the award of backpay commences. The
Agency maintains that because of the time-after-competitive-appointment
restriction of 5 CFR 330.501, /1/ the Arbitrator could not award the
grievant by a constructive retroactive temporary promotion the pay of
the higher-grade position until the grievant had served 3 months (i.e.,
90 days) in her appointed position. With the grievant having been hired
and appointed on June 1, 1980, the Agency argues that the award must be
modified to commence the award of backpay on August 30, 1980, rather
than June 16, 1980. The Authority agrees.
The Authority has expressly held that an arbitrator cannot consistent
with governing civil service law and regulation award as corrective
action for an aggrieved employee a temporary promotion to a position
made retroactive to a date on which the employee was not qualified for
promotion to that position. Adjutant General, State of Michigan,
Department of Military Affairs and National Association of Government
Employees, 11 FLRA No. 7 (1983). Because it is substantiated that the
grievant could not have been temporarily promoted to the higher-grade
position until August 30, 1980, rather than June 16, 1980, the award is
modified accordingly.
Issued, Washington, D.C., August 31, 1984
Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
Ronald W. Haughton, Member
Henry B. Frazier III, Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ 5 CFR 330.501 pertinently provides: "An agency may promote an
employee . . . only after 3 months have elapsed since the employee's
latest nontemporary competitive appointment."