31:1268(114)AR - Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH and AFGE Council 214 -- 1988 FLRAdec AR
[ v31 p1268 ]
31:1268(114)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
31 FLRA NO. 114 AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO Agency and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL NO. 214, AFL-CIO Union Case No. 0-AR-1473 DECISION I. Statement of the Case This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of Arbitrator Donald V. Staudter filed by the Union under section 7122 (a) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. This case concerns the Arbitrator's interpretation of the time limit for the Union to invoke expedited arbitration under the parties' collective bargaining agreement. For the reasons stated below, the Union's exception is denied. II. Background and Arbitrator's Award The Union filed a grievance over the interpretation of section 7.08(c) of the parties' master labor agreement, entitled "Invoking Expedited Arbitration." That section states that if the Union wishes to invoke expedited arbitration, the Union must present to the Agency "a written request for expedited arbitration within five workdays of the (Agency's) Step 3 decision." The issue before the Arbitrator was whether the time limit for the Union to invoke expedited arbitration was within 5 workdays of the date of the Step 3 grievance decision or within 5 workdays of the Union's receipt of the Step 3 grievance decision. Based on his interpretation of the parties' agreement, the Arbitrator determined that the time limit for the Union to invoke expedited arbitration was within 5 workdays of the date of the Agency's Step 3 grievance decision. He found no evidence or past practice establishing a different time frame. III. Discussion The Union contends that the Arbitrator's award violates section 7121(b) of the Statute. Specifically, the Union asserts that the award violates the requirements of section 7121(b) that the parties' negotiated grievance procedure: (1) "be fair and simple"; (2) "assure an exclusive representative the right, in its own behalf or on behalf of any employee in the unit represented by the exclusive representative, to present and process grievances"; and (3) "provide that any grievance not satisfactorily settled under the negotiated grievance procedure shall be subject to binding arbitration which may be invoked by either the exclusive representative or the agency." The Union asserts that under the award, it will not be able to invoke expedited arbitration if it receives Step 3 decisions more than 5 workdays after the date of those decisions. According to the Union, the award violates section 7121(b) because it may prevent the Union from invoking expedited arbitration. The Agency did not file an opposition. We find that the award does not conflict with section 7121(b) of the Statute. The Arbitrator's interpretation of the contractual provision, which requires the Union to present a written request to the Agency within 5 workdays of the Agency's Step 3 grievance decision, is not in and of itself unfair, does not necessarily preclude the Union from invoking expedited arbitration, and is not otherwise in violation of section 7121(b). We conclude, therefore, that the Union has failed to establish that the Arbitrator's award is deficient on any of the grounds set forth in section 7122(a) of the Statute; that is, that the award is contrary to law, rule, or regulation or that it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by Federal courts in private sector labor-management relations. This case does not present an issue as to a specific application of the parties' contractual provision. Therefore, we do not address whether or not any particular application of this contractual provision would violate section 7121(b) of the Statute. The Union's contentions constitute no more than disagreement with the Arbitrator's interpretation of the parties' agreement. We consistently have held that such disagreement provides no basis for finding an award deficient. See, for example, Defense Logistics Agency and The DLA council of American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) AFL - CIO Locals, Local 3953, 29 FLRA 465 (1987). Therefore, the Union's exception is denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., April 28, 1988. Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman Jean McKee, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY