FLRA.gov

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

National Association of Independent Labor, Local 5 (Union) and United States Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency, Distribution Red River, Texas (Agency)

 

65 FLRA No. 160                                              
 
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF INDEPENDENT LABOR
LOCAL 5
(Union)
 
and
 
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
DISTRIBUTION RED RIVER, TEXAS
(Agency)
 
0-AR-4736
 
_____
 
DECISION
 
April 28, 2011
 
_____
 
Before the Authority: Carol Waller Pope, Chairman, and Thomas M. Beck and Ernest DuBester, Members
        This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Carol Kyler 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 exceptions. 
        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 grounds raised in the exceptions and set forth in § 7122(a). See Fraternal Order of Police, Pentagon Police Labor Comm., 65 FLRA 781, 784-85 (2011) (denying a contrary-to-law exception where excepting party did not cite any law with which the arbitrator’s award conflicted); AFGE, Local 1802, 50 FLRA 396, 398 (1995) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party challenges a conclusion based on the arbitrator’s interpretation of the parties’ agreement); U.S. Dep’t of Labor (OSHA), 34 FLRA 573, 575 (1990) (award not deficient as failing to draw its essence from the parties’ collective bargaining agreement where excepting party fails to establish that the award cannot in any rational way be derived from the agreement; is so unfounded in reason and fact and so unconnected to the wording and purpose of the agreement as to manifest an infidelity to the obligation of the arbitrator; does not represent a plausible interpretation of the agreement; or evidences a manifest disregard of the agreement).
Accordingly, the Union’s exceptions are denied.