---

 19 FLRA No. 71
 
 172d INFANTRY BRIGADE, 
 FORT RICHARDSON, ALASKA
 Activity
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, LOCALS 1712, 1834 and 1949
 Union
 
                                            Case No. O-AR-946
 
                                 DECISION
 
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator Paul D. Jackson filed by the Activity under section 7122(a)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425
 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
 
    The Arbitrator stated the issue of the grievance to be whether the
 Activity violated the parties' collective bargaining agreement by
 assigning a supervisor to perform work on an overtime basis rather than
 the grievant.  The Arbitrator granted the grievance finding that the
 Activity violated the collective bargaining agreement by assigning work
 to a supervisor which should have been assigned to the grievant, and the
 Arbitrator awarded the grievant backpay in the amount of eight hours of
 overtime.
 
    As one of its exceptions, the Agency contends that the award is
 contrary to management's right to assign work pursuant to section
 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute.  The Authority agrees.
 
    The Authority has repeatedly recognized that the plain language of
 section 7106 provides that "nothing" in the Statute shall "affect the
 authority" of an agency to exercise the rights enumerated in that
 section.  E.g., American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO,
 Local 1968 and Department of Transportation, Saint Lawrence Seaway
 Development Corporation, Massena, New York, 5 FLRA 70, 79 (1981), aff'd
 sub nom. AFGE Local 1968 v. FLRA, 691 F.2d 565 (D.C. Cir. 1982), cert.
 denied 461 U.S. 926 (1983).  Therefore, the Authority has consistently
 held that no arbitration award may interpret or enforce a collective
 bargaining agreement so as to improperly deny an agency the authority to
 exercise its rights under that section.  Id.; National Treasury
 Employees Union and U.S. Customs Service, 17 FLRA No. 12 (1985);  U.S.
 Customs Service, Laredo, Texas and Chapter 145, National Treasury
 Employees Union, 17 FLRA No. 17 (1985).  Section 7106(a)(2)(B) of the
 Statute, in particular, reserves to management officials the authority
 to assign work.  With respect to the assignment of work on overtime, in
 American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, International
 Council of U.S. Marshals Service Locals and Department of Justice, U.S.
 Marshals Service, 11 FLRA 672 (1983) (proposal 2), the Authority found
 inconsistent with management's right to assign work a proposal which
 precluded the agency from assigning work normally performed by unit
 employees to supervisors beyond their normal duty hours if the work
 otherwise would be performed by unit employees on overtime.  Similarly,
 in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, National Joint
 Council of Food Inspection Locals and Department of Agriculture, Food
 Safety and Quality Service, Washington, D.C., 9 FLRA 663 (1982)
 (proposal 1) the Authority found inconsistent with section 7106(a)(2)(B)
 a proposal providing that management could not assign duties normally
 performed by employees in the bargaining unit to supervisors when those
 duties could be performed by unit employees on overtime.  In terms of
 this case, the Authority therefore finds that the award is deficient as
 contrary to management's right to assign work pursuant to section
 7106(a)(2)(B) by interpreting and enforcing the parties' collective
 bargaining agreement so as to negate management's determination as to
 which personnel will receive particular work assignments.  Accordingly,
 the award is set aside.  /1/ Issued, Washington, D.C., August 12, 1985
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ In view of this decision, it is not necessary to address the
 other exceptions to the award. 
 
 
 

---