15:0891(166)AR - VA, Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital and AFGE Local 3511 -- 1984 FLRAdec AR
[ v15 p891 ]
15:0891(166)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 166
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION,
AUDIE L. MURPHY MEMORIAL
VETERANS HOSPITAL
Activity
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL 3511
Union
Case No. O-AR-397
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of
Arbitrator J. Earl Williams 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. /1/
The parties submitted to the Arbitrator the issue of whether
management has the right to file a grievance. The Arbitrator determined
that under the parties' collective bargaining agreement which had been
negotiated under the provisions of Executive Order No. 11491 (the
Order), management did not have the right to file a grievance.
In its exception the Agency essentially contends that the award is
contrary to the Statute. The position of the Agency in support of its
exception is that the Arbitrator was required to interpret the parties'
agreement to provide for the right of management to file grievances in
order for his award to be consistent with the Statute. The Agency
maintains that section 7135 of the Statute only permits the continuation
of a lawful agreement, and the parties presumed that the collective
bargaining agreement they agreed to continue was lawful. Thus, the
Agency argues that the Arbitrator was therefore required to interpret
the agreement to provide for management's right to file grievances
because to interpret the agreement as the Arbitrator did precludes it
from being lawful within the meaning of section 7135. In this respect
the Agency contends that in order to be a lawful agreement, the
agreement must comply with the mandate of the Statute requiring agency
access to the negotiated grievance and arbitration procedures.
The Authority concludes that the Agency's exception fails to
establish that the award is contrary to the Statute. Although the
Agency is correct in its assertion that the Statute mandates agency
access to the negotiated grievance and arbitration procedures, Laborers'
International Union of North America, AFL-CIO-CLC, Local 1267 and
Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Depot Tracy, Tracy, California, 14
FLRA No. 91 (1984) (proposals 8-9), the Agency's assertion that this
mandate precludes continuation of the terms of an agreement entered into
before the effective date of the Statute that does not provide for
management's right to file grievances cannot be sustained. Under
section 13 of the Order, it was not mandatory to provide agency access
to the negotiated grievance and arbitration procedures, and consequently
those policies of the Order have been superseded and pursuant to section
7135(b) of the Statute are no longer in effect. See Interpretation and
Guidance, 2 FLRA 273, 278 n.7 (1979). However, contrary to the Agency's
assertion, when the parties to an agreement entered into before the
effective date of the Statute have not provided for agency access to the
negotiated grievance and arbitration procedures, they may jointly agree
to renew or continue that agreement under the provisions of section
7135(a)(1) of the Statute. It is only when one of the parties objects
to the continuation of the negotiated grievance procedure insofar as it
precludes agency access that continuation of that provision would be
prohibited and the agency access required by the Statute would apply.
See id.
Thus, nothing in the Statute precludes the parties in this case from
continuing the terms of their collective bargaining agreement, which
terms do not provide for management's right to file grievances. Here,
the Agency confirms that the parties have continued the collective
bargaining agreement they entered into before the effective date of the
Statute and that neither party objected to the continuation of the
negotiated grievance procedure. In these circumstances the Authority
finds no actions which constitute an objection to the continuation of
that negotiated grievance procedure so as to require the access to
arbitration provided by the Statute. Cf. Veterans Administration Data
Processing Center, Hines, Illinois and Service Employees International
Union, AFL-CIO, Local 73, 15 FLRA No. 167 (1984) (wherein the Authority
found that the Agency's actions constituted an objection to the
continuation of the agreement provision barring it from access to
arbitration and, consequently, held that access to arbitration by the
Agency was required by the Statute).
Therefore, nothing in the Statute required the Arbitrator to
interpret the parties' agreement to provide for management's right to
file grievances. To the contrary, the question of whether management
had the right to file grievances was solely a question of the
interpretation and application of the parties' collective bargaining
agreement. Thus, the Agency's exception constitutes nothing more than
disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation of the agreement and
does not otherwise establish that the award is contrary to the Statute.
Accordingly, the exception is denied.
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/ The Union filed an opposition which was untimely requesting that
the expired time limit be waived. Because the extraordinary
circumstances required by section 2429.23 of the Authority's Rules and
Regulations have not been substantiated, the request is denied and the
opposition has not been considered.