Please note that Friday, January 20, 2017, is a federal holiday for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.  The following FLRA offices will not be open to accept in-person case filings or to respond to phone calls on that day:  the Authority’s Case Intake and Publication Office, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the Washington Regional Office, and the Federal Service Impasses Panel.  The FLRA’s eFiling System remains available.         

34:0093(22)AR - AFGE, LOCAL 2904 and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY U.S. MARINE CORPS FINANCIAL CENTER KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI -- 1989 FLRAdec AR



[ v34 p93 ]
34:0093(22)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:


  34 FLRA NO. 22
  

    AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
                    LOCAL 2904

                       and

             U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
         U.S. MARINE CORPS FINANCIAL CENTER
               KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI

                     0-AR-1784

	    ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTION

     		December 29,  1989

     Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.

I. Statement of the Case

     This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the
award of Arbitrator J.C. Fogelberg. The Arbitrator dismissed the
grievance over the grievant's removal. The Arbitrator determined
that the grievant had waived her grievance rights when she
executed a "last chance" agreement.

     AFGE Local 2904 filed an exception 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 Marine Corps Financial Center, Kansas City, Missouri (the
Activity) did not file an opposition to the exception.

     For the reasons stated below, we are without jurisdiction
under section 7122(a) of the Statute to review the Union's
exception.

II. Background and the Arbitrator's Award

     On April 28, 1988, the grievant and the Activity executed an
agreement. Under the agreement, the grievant agreed to seek
professional assistance for her problems with alcohol, and
the Activity agreed to delay the decision on the proposed removal
of the grievant and afford the grievant an opportunity to resolve
her problems. The grievant also agreed to the reinstatement of
the removal action is she violated the agreement and to the
waiver of her right to grieve the removal action if it was
reinstated.

     On December 2, 1988, the grievant received a "Notice of
Removal" which reinstated the removal action because she had
violated the provisions of the April 28 agreement. A grievance
was filed over the grievant's removal and submitted to
arbitration on the threshold issue of the validity of the April
28 agreement.

     The Arbitrator determined that the agreement was valid.
Accordingly, the Arbitrator dismissed the grievance.

III. Exception

     The Union contends that the award is contrary to the
Statute. The Union argues that the Arbitrator erred by enforcing
an agreement which was entered into without the written consent
of the Union.

IV. Discussion

     We are without jurisdiction under section 7122(a) of the
Statute to review the Union's exception.

     Section 7122(a) of the Statute provides, in pertinent part,
as follows:

     Either party to arbitration under this chapter may file with
the Authority an exception to any arbitrator's award pursuant to
the arbitration (other than an award relating to a matter
described in section 7121(f) of this title).

     The matters described in section 7121(f) include serious
adverse actions covered under 5 U.S.C. 7512, such as removals.
Review of arbitration awards relating to such matters, like
review of decisions of the Merit Systems Protection Board, may be
obtained by filing an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 7703.

     Because the award relates to the removal of the grievant, a
matter which is covered under 5 U.S.C. 7512 and described in
section 7121(f), exceptions to the award may not be filed with
the Authority under section 7122(a) of  the Statute.
Consequently, we are without jurisdiction to review the Union's
exception and it is hereby dismissed.

V. Order

     The Union's exception is dismissed.