FLRA.gov

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

Menu

You are here

  • Home
  • International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 591 (Union) and United States, Department of the Navy, Norfolk, Virginia (Agency)

International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 591 (Union) and United States, Department of the Navy, Norfolk, Virginia (Agency)

[ v61 p239 ]

61 FLRA No. 44

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD
OF POLICE OFFICERS, LOCAL 591
(Union)

and

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
(Agency)

0-AR-3991

______

DECISION

September 13, 2005

______

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 David M. Kaplan 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 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).

      Accordingly, the Union's exception is denied.

Footnote * for 61 FLRA No. 44 - Authority's Decision

   The Union's submission contains additional exceptions that clearly pertain to a different case. The arguments in support of those exceptions are not properly before us in this proceeding and have not been considered.