FLRA.gov

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1858 (Union) and United States Department of the Arrmy, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama (Agency)

73 FLRA No. 85

 

AMERICAN FEDERATION

OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

LOCAL 1858

(Union)

 

and

 

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALABAMA

(Agency)

 

0-AR-5847

 

_____

 

DECISION

 

February 13, 2023

 

_____

 

Before the Authority:  Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman, and Colleen Duffy Kiko, Member

 

This matter is before the Authority on an exception to an award of Arbitrator Trevor Bain filed by the Union under § 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute (the Statute)[1] and part 2425 of the Authority’s Regulations.[2]  The Agency filed an opposition to the Union’s exception.

 

We have determined that this case is appropriate for issuance as an expedited, abbreviated decision under § 2425.7 of the Authority’s Regulations.[3]

 

Under § 7122(a) of the Statute,[4] 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, we conclude that the award is not deficient on any of the grounds raised in the exception and set forth in § 7122(a).[5]

 

Accordingly, we deny the Union’s exception.

 

 

 

[1] 5 U.S.C. § 7122(a).

[2] 5 C.F.R. pt. 2425.

[3] Id. § 2425.7 (“Even absent a [party’s] request, the Authority may issue expedited, abbreviated decisions in appropriate cases.”).

[4] 5 U.S.C. § 7122.

[5] U.S. DOL (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 purposes 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).