The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) is currently closed due to a lapse in appropriations. FLRA offices, including the Authority’s Office of Case Intake and Publication, the Office of Administrative Law Judges, the Federal Service Impasses Panel, and all Office of the General Counsel Regional Offices, are not accepting filings, and no FLRA personnel are available for that purpose, except as provided below in Section 1.  Read the full announcement here.

FLRA.gov

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

National Air Traffic Controllers Association, AFL-CIO, (Union) and United States, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (Agency)

[ v60 p669 ]

60 FLRA No. 129

NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS
ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO
(Union)

and

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
(Agency)

0-AR-3918

_____

DECISION

March 2, 2005

_____

Before the Authority: Dale Cabaniss, Chairman, and
Carol Waller Pope and Tony Armendariz, Members

      This case is before the Authority on an exception to an award of Arbitrator Jay E. Grenig 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, and Authority precedent, the Authority concludes that the award is not deficient on the ground raised in the exception and set forth in § 7122(a). See United States Dep't of the Air Force, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo., 48 FLRA 589, 593-94 (1993) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party either challenges a factual matter that the parties disputed at arbitration or fails to demonstrate that the central fact underlying the award is clearly erroneous, but for which a different result would have been reached by the arbitrator).

      Accordingly, the Union's exception is denied.