[ v57 p575 ]
57 FLRA No. 104
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 446
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
VETERANS INTEGRATED SERVICE
October 23, 2001
Before the Authority: Dale Cabaniss, Chairman, and
Carol Waller Pope and Tony Armendariz, Members.
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to an award of Arbitrator John B. Dorsey filed by the Union under § 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Regulations. The Agency filed an opposition to the Union's exception.
Under § 7122(a) of the Statute, an award is deficient if it is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation; or it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. Upon careful consideration of the entire record in this case, including the Arbitrator's formulation of the issue, and Authority precedent, the Authority concludes that the award is not deficient on the grounds raised in the exception and set forth in § 7122(a). We construe the Union's exception -- that the award is deficient because the Arbitrator failed to consider the Agency's alleged violations of the time limits as set forth in Article 42, Section 9 of the Master Agreement --as a claim that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority by not resolving an issue submitted to arbitration. This contention does not provide any basis for finding the award deficient. See United States Dep't of the Navy, Naval Base, Norfolk, Va., 51 FLRA 305, 307-08 (1995) (award not deficient on ground that arbitrator exceeded his authority where excepting party does not establish that arbitrator failed to resolve an issue submitted to arbitration, disregarded specific limitations on his authority, or awarded relief to persons who were not encompassed within the grievance). In addition, to the extent that the Union is arguing that the Arbitrator must abide by another arbitrator's award, we reject this claim. See AFGE, Local 2280, 51 FLRA 620, 624 (1995) ("arbitration awards are not precedential, and, therefore, a contention that an award conflicts with other arbitration awards provides no basis for finding an award deficient").
Accordingly, the Union's exception is denied.