[ v22 p60 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
22 FLRA No. 6 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1546 Union and SHARPE ARMY DEPOT Activity Case No. 0-AR-1110 DECISION I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator Jean Wilcox filed by the Union pursuant to section 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. II. BACKGROUND AND ARBITRATOR'S AWARD A grievance over the removal of the grievant was submitted to arbitration at which a preliminary issue as presented of whether the grievance initiated by the Union directly with Commander of the Activity complied with the requirements of the parties' negotiated grievance procedure. The Arbitrator determined that the grievance in this case was not the type of grievance properly filed directly with the Commander and that consequently the Union had failed to comply with the requirements of the parties' negotiated grievance procedure in filing the grievance. Accordingly, the Arbitrator ruled that the grievance was not arbitratable and that the merits of the grievance would not be considered. III. EXCEPTION The Union contends that the award is deficient because it is incomplete, ambiguous, and contradictory so as to make implementation impossible. IV. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS With respect to the Union's contention, e Authority has advised that to find an award deficient on this basis, there must be a showing that the award is ambiguous or contradictory, or that implementation is impossible, because of the award being unclear in its meaning and effect or because of the award being too uncertain in its effect to be sustained. Veterans Administration Hospital, Newington, Connecticut and National Association of Government Employees,Local R1-109, 5 FLRA 64 (1981). In this case the Union fails to establish that the Arbitrator's finding the grievance nonarbitrable and refusing to consider the merits is in any manner unclear in its meaning and effect or too uncertain in its effect to be sustained. Instead, this exception constitutes nothing more than disagreement with the Arbitrator's determination that there had not been compliance with the procedural requirements of the negotiated grievance procedure of the parties' collective bargaining agreement. In this respect, the Authority has consistently and repeatedly held that such questions are for resolution by the arbitrator and are not subject to review or challenge before the Authority. Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Department of the Army and Local 2154, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, 15 FLRA 974 (1984). Consequently, the Union's exception pfovides no basis for finding the award deficient. V. DECISION For these reasons the Union's exception is denied. /*/ Issued, Washington, D.C., June 4, 1986. /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman /s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /*/ Although the issue has not been raised by the parties, the Authority confirms its jurisdiction to resolve the Union's exception. Because the Arbitrator's award pertained solely to the question of whether the grievance in this case was filed in accordance with the terms of the parties' agreement, it is not apparent that the award relates to a removal action within the meaning of section 7121(f) and section 7122(a) of the Statute. Naval Ordnance Station, Louisville, Kentucky and Lodge No. 830, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, 11 FLRA 19, 20 n.3 (1983).