U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES, SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION
Respondent
|
|
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO Charging Party |
Case No. 3-CA-80274
[41 FLRA 755 (1991)
enf'd 976 F.2d 1409
(D.C. Cir. 1992)]
|
Bruce D. Rosenstein, Esquire For the General Counsel
Mark D. Roth, Esquire Judith D. Galat, Esquire For the Charging Party
Before: WILLIAM B. DEVANEY Administrative Law Judge
DECISION AND ORDER
ON MOTION FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES
UNDER THE BACK PAY ACT
DECISION
The Authority issued its decision herein on July 19, 1991,
in which it ordered compliance with the arbitrator's award,
notwithstanding that the arbitrator had no jurisdiction, for the
reason that the award had become final upon the Federal Circuit's
denial of OPM's petition for review. On August 15, 1991, the
Authority granted the Charging Party, American Federation of
Government Employees, AFL-CIO, an extension of time to September
19, 1991, to file its application for attorney fees pursuant to the
Back Pay Act, 5 U.S.C. § 5576. The Charging Party's application for
attorney fees, dated and postmarked September 19, 1991, was timely
filed with the Authority.
Pursuant to section 2430.7(a) of the Authority's
Regula-tions, 5 C.F.R. § 2430.7(a), by Order dated September 27,
1991, the application was referred to the undersigned. Respondent
by timely motion, dated October 23, 1991, and received on October
24, 1991, moved that action on the application be postponed pending
disposition of the appeal filed herein. By Order dated November 4,
1991, pursuant to section 2430.7(b) of the Authority's Regulations,
5 C.F.R. § 2430.7(b), proceedings for the award of fees were
stayed, ". . . pending final disposition of the petition for review
by the United States Court of Appeals. Upon final dispo-sition of
court review a new time schedule will be fixed for the submission
of any answer or comments to the application. . . ."
On October 13, 1992, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit granted the Authority's
application for enforcement of its order (FLRA may enforce
compliance with arbitration award regardless of whether arbitrator
had contractual jurisdiction in original proceeding), 976 F.2d 1409
(D.C. Cir. 1992); and by Order dated December 15, 1992, an Order
issued fixing time for responses, specifically, as applicable, the
Order provided,
"ORDERED: 1. That within 30 days after service of this Order, Respondent may
file an answer to Charging Party's application . . . (2) That the General Counsel
may file comments on the Charging Party's application within 30 days after it is
served. . . ."
The Order of December 15, 1992, was duly served on December 15,
1992, by certified mail, on, inter
alia,
Timothy M. White, Esquire
Department of Health and Human Services
Cohen Building, Room 5362
300 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
(Mr. White having been the only person who entered his
appearance for Respondent on the Attorney Fees Application)
Bruce D. Rosenstein, Esquire
Federal Labor Relations Authority
1111 18th Street, N.W.
P.O. Box 33758
Washington D.C. 20033-0758
Respondent, although duly served by mail on December 15, 1992,
filed no answer to the application for attorney's fees within 30
days after service of the December 15, 1992, Order; and General
Counsel filed no comments on the application within 30 days after
service of the December 15, 1992, Order.
Charging Party requests an attorney's fee for the services
of Anne M. Wagner, a 1985 graduate of the National Law Center,
George Washington University, to be paid to the AFGE Legal
Representation Fund. Ms. Wagner's affidavit claims a total of 51.1
hours for services from December 1987, to June 11, 1991, and sets
forth in detail, by date, the actions involved. Charging Party
seeks a market rate but, "In the event that the FLRA does not award
a market rate fee award, AFGE requests that the fee be awarded
based on a cost-plus formula." ("Memorandum In Support of Motion
For Attorney's Fees," p.12) (hereinafter "Memorandum"). The
Authority, in United States Department of Justice,
Bureau of Prisons, Washington, D.C. and Bureau of Prisons, Federal
Correctional Institution, Ray Brook, New York, 46 FLRA No.
89, 46 FLRA 1002 (1992); and U.S. Customs
Service, 46 FLRA No. 98, 46 FLRA 1080 (1992), has held
that,
". . . in this and future cases, where attorney fees are awarded under the Back
Pay Act to successful employees represented by union attorneys, we will use
market rate fees to calculate the payment of those attorney fees. To the extent
that previous decisions applied a cost-plus formula for deter-mining such attorney
fees, those decisions will no longer be followed." (46 FLRA 1007) (See, also,
46 FLRA 1095).
Accordingly, the fee requested herein will be considered on the
basis of market rates.
Charging Party's claimed market rate of $130.00 is fully
supported by "Laffey" matrix [Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 572 F.Supp. 354,
371 (D.D.C. 1983); Save Our Cumberland Mountains
v. Hodel, 857 F.2d 1516, 1525 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (en banc)] attached to the
affidavit of Joseph A. Yablonski which shows that the prevailing
rate for attorneys in private firms in Washington, D.C. with
experience equivalent to Ms. Wagner's years of service for the
years 1987-1989, ranged from 105.00 to 135.00; is fully consistent
with the sworn declaration of Mr. Gary E. Klein, a managing
director of Smith, Klein and Partners, a Washington, D.C. legal
search consulting firm, and various surveys and publications
attached to his declaration. Since there is no objection to the fee
sought, and I find it fully supported by the affidavits and
declarations, I find that the fee requested is reasonable. As there
is no assertion that the work of Ms. Wagner was merely duplicative
of that of General Counsel, and Charging Party vigorously asserts
that it was not, Memorandum, pp. 15-17, it is unnecessary to
express an opinion since, in the absence of any such allegation,
there is adequate basis to dispel any appearance that Charging
Party's efforts "merely duplicated" the efforts of General Counsel.
United States Department of Justice, Bureau of
Prisons, Washington, D.C. and Bureau of Prisons, Federal
Correctional Institution, Ray Brook, New York, 32 FLRA 20,
28 (1988). By like token, in the absence of any contention that an
award of attorney fees is not warranted in the interest of justice,
I express no opinion as to whether an award is warranted in the
interest of justice, Naval Air Development Center,
Department of the Navy, 21 FLRA 131, 137, 159 (1986);
United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Region VI and United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development, Region VI, San Antonio Area Office, 24
FLRA 885, 886-887 (1986), as the Authority's prior action in
enforcing the award created a presumption that enforcement of the
award, despite the arbitrator's lack of jurisdiction, was in the
public interest and that presumption governs in the absence of a
showing to the contrary.
Accordingly, it is recommended that the Authority adopt the
following Order.
Pursuant to the Back Pay Act, 5 U.S.C. § 5596, and the Civil
Service Reform Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. § 7701(g), the Authority
grants an award of attorney fees for services performed by Ms. Anne
M. Wagner and orders the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Social Security Administration to pay $6,643.00 to the
American Federation of Government Employees Legal Representation
Fund.
____________________
WILLIAM B. DEVANEY Administrative Law Judge
Date: April 8, 1993
Washington, DC