At this time FLRA remains fully operational. Effective Friday July 31, 2020, the agency now extends the prohibition on in-person filings indefinitely.  

See details: here.

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

27:0486(69)AR - VA Medical Center, Kansas City, MO and AFGE Local No. 2663 -- 1987 FLRAdec AR

[ v27 p486 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:

 27 FLRA No. 69
                                            Case No. 0-AR-1313
                         I.  Statement of the Case
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator Russell C. Neas filed by the Union under section 7122(a of
 the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and
 part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.  The Activity filed
 an opposition.  /*/
                  II.  Background and Arbitrator's Award
    The parties framed the following issue for submission to the
          Did the (Activity) fail to allow a reasonable amount of time to
       the Union President . . . during the period January 27, 1986, to
       February 25, 1986, as required by Article X of the local agreement
       between the Agency and Union dated October 30, 1972?  If so, what
       shall be the remedy?
    The Arbitrator found that the Activity had not failed to allow a
 reasonable amount of official time as required by the agreement and
 therefore denied the grievance.
                             III.  Discussion
    The Union has filed exceptions disputing the Arbitrator's denial of
 the grievance.  The Union contends, among other things, that the
 Arbitrator was biased, that he based his award on a "false premise," and
 that he did not confine his award to the time frame in the stipulated
                              IV.  Conclusion
    We conclude that the Union has failed to establish that the
 Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in
 section 7122(a) of the Statute;  that is, that the award is contrary to
 law, rule or regulation, or that the award is deficient on other grounds
 similar to those applied by federal courts in private sector
 labor-management relations cases.  See, for example, American Federation
 of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, New York-New Jersey Council of
 District Office Locals, Social Security Administration and Department of
 Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration District
 Office Operations, 7 FLRA 413 (1981) (various assertions as to why the
 award interpreting an official time provision of an agreement was
 deficient were determined to constitute nothing more than disagreement
 with the Arbitrator's interpretation of the agreement and provided no
 basis for finding the award deficient).  Accordingly, the Union's
 exceptions are denied.
    Issued, Washington, D.C., June 23, 1987.
                                       /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
                                       /s/ Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       /s/ Jean McKee, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
                ---------------  FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
    (*) In its opposition the Activity contends that the Union's
 exceptions should be dismissed as procedurally deficient.  We find that
 the exceptions are not procedurally deficient and reject the Activity's