47:0975(94)AR - - Agriculture Research Service, Plum Island Animal Disease Center and AFGE Local 1940 - - 1993 FLRAdec AR - - v47 p975
[ v47 p975 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
47 FLRA No. 94
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE
PLUM ISLAND ANIMAL DISEASE CENTER
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
June 29, 1993
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.
I. Statement of the Case
This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to a supplemental award of Arbitrator Daniel F. Brent filed by the Agency 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 Union filed an opposition to the exceptions.
In his supplemental award, the Arbitrator clarified that his original award of overtime pay was intended to apply to all work which employees performed on any sixth consecutive workday. The Arbitrator also clarified the entitlement period for such overtime pay.
For the following reasons, we conclude that the supplemental award is deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute. Accordingly, we will set it aside.
II. Background and Supplemental Award
The grievance arose when the Agency scheduled a tour of duty that required employees to work 10 consecutive days followed by 4 consecutive days off. The schedule called for alternating 2 days off and 5 days of work during one administrative workweek, and 5 days of work and 2 days off during the next administrative workweek. In his original award, the Arbitrator determined that the tour of duty violated Article VIII, Section 2 of the parties' collective bargaining agreement.(1) In particular, the Arbitrator concluded that employees who "worked in excess of five consecutive days during a seven consecutive day administrative work week" were entitled to overtime pay and ordered the Agency to make such payments under the Back Pay Act. Original Award at 14.
Responding to a request for clarification by both parties about the circumstances under which employees were entitled to overtime pay, the Arbitrator, in his supplemental award, stated:
[T]he true damage to an employee who was required to work five days in one administrative work week which were directly contiguous to five days in the next administrative work week is that an employee is required to work on his day off, which should have followed the fifth consecutive work day. This lost day off must be construed as an overtime assignment and is compensable at time-and-a-half.
Supplemental Award at 2. The Arbitrator also stated that the entitlement period for overtime pay would continue until such time as "the [scheduling] practice is stopped or until the parties bargain an alternative solution." Id. at 3.
III. Positions of the Parties
The Agency excepts to the supplemental award insofar as it directs the Agency to pay overtime to employees for work performed on any sixth consecutive workday. The Agency claims that such overtime payments are contrary to 5 U.S.C. § 5542 because they encompass pay when an employee has worked fewer than 40 hours in an administrative workweek or 8 hours in a day.(2) The Agency also argues that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority "by extending the period of the award to dates well beyond that on which the grievance was filed." Exceptions at 1.
The Union maintains that the supplemental award does not conflict with 5 U.S.C. § 5542 and that the Agency's practice of scheduling employees to work more than 5 consecutive days violates the parties' agreement.
IV. Analysis and Conclusions
An arbitration award is deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute if, among other things, the award is contrary to law or Government-wide regulation. See American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923 and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, Baltimore, Maryland, 45 FLRA 106 (1992)(SSA). For the following reasons, we find that the supplemental award is inconsistent with 5 U.S.C. § 5542 and 5 C.F.R. § 550.111(a).
In the supplemental award, the Arbitrator awarded overtime pay to all employees who worked more than 5 consecutive workdays during a tour of duty that spanned two administrative workweeks.(3) However, under 5 U.S.C. § 5542 and its implementing regulation, 5 C.F.R. § 550.111(a), overtime may not be paid unless an employee works more than 40 hours in a 7-day administrative workweek or more than 8 hours in a day. That an employee is required to work more than 5 consecutive days does not, in and of itself, entitle an employee to overtime pay under applicable law. For example, Sanford v. Weinberger, 752 F.2d 636 (Fed. Cir. 1985) addressed whether employees were entitled to overtime under 5 U.S.C. § 5542 for working 7 consecutive days. In finding that the employees were not entitled to overtime, the court held that:
it is within the parameters of the administrative workweek designated in advance by the [agency] that it must be determined whether plaintiffs were paid the proper amount of overtime. The number of consecutive days worked by employees, spanning more than one administrative workweek, is irrelevant to this determination.
752 F.2d at 638.
In this case, the parties do not dispute that the affected employees' administrative workweek properly was designated in advance by the Agency "'as beginning on Sunday at 12:01 a.m. and ending the following Saturday at midnight.'" Award at 6 (quoting Agency Directive 402.1). Moreover, the Union does not dispute that affected employees' sixth consecutive workday was the first day of a new administrative workweek. As there is no indication in the record that employees worked more than 40 hours during any one administrative workweek or more than 8 hours in any one day, overtime may not be paid under applicable law. Accordingly, the supplemental award, requiri