20:0792(94)AR - Army Missile Command, Army Communications Command Agency--Redstone, Army Commissary, Redstone Arsenal, AL and AFGE Local 1858 -- 1985 FLRAdec AR
[ v20 p792 ]
20:0792(94)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
20 FLRA No. 94
U.S. ARMY MISSILE COMMAND,
U.S. ARMY COMMUNICATIONS COMMAND AGENCY--
REDSTONE, U.S. ARMY COMMISSARY,
REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALABAMA
Activity
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1858, AFL-CIO
Union
Case No. 0-AR-998
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of
Arbitrator George Munchus III 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.
A grievance was filed on behalf of one of a number of candidates for
a GS-5 vacancy in a program assistant position claiming that the
selected employee was given an advantage over other competing employees
as the result of extended details. Although the grievant was granted by
the Activity priority consideration for the next appropriate vacancy,
the grievance was submitted to arbitration when the immediate promotion
of grievant was not granted by the Activity. Thy Arbitrator would that
the selection "appear(ed) to conflict with merit principles" and
therefore violated agency regulation providing that practices must be
avoided with would indicate preselection or promotion based on
favoritism. Although the Arbitrator refused to decide whether the
selection erroneous and refused to vacate the position, he ordered that
the grievant shall be immediately promoted to the next GS-5 vacancy in a
program assistant position for which she was qualified.
In its exception, the Agency principally contends that the award is
contrary to management's right to make selections for appointments as
set forth in section 7106(a)(2)(C) of the Statute and FPM chapter 335.
The Authority agrees.
The Authority consistently has held in this respect that management's
right to make the actual selections for promotion can only be abridged
if the Arbitrator finds a direct connection between improper agency
action and the failure of a specific employee to be selected for
promotion. E.g., Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of
Transportation and American Federation of Government Employees, Local
3313, AFL-CIO, 17 FLRA No. 14 (1985); American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 12 and United States Department of Labor, 15 FLRA No.
113 (1984). In terms of this case, the Authority concludes that the
Arbitrator failed to make the necessary finding. Although the
Arbitrator found that the Activity had violated regulation by failing to
avoid practices indicating preselection or favoritism, he did not find
the selection for the position to be erroneous and he did not find that
the grievant, one of several candidates considered for the position,
would have been selected but for that violation. Consequently, the
award is deficient as contrary to management's right to make selections
for appointment as set forth in section 7106(a)(2)(C) of the Statute and
Requirement 4 of FPM chapter 335, subchapter 1-4, and accordingly is set
aside.
Issued, Washington, D.C., December 4, 1985.
(s)---
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
(s)---
William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY