FLRA.gov

U.S. Federal Labor Relations Authority

Search form

Menu

You are here

  • Home
  • American Federation of Government Employees, Local 4055 (Union) and United States Department of the Army, Headquarters, Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (Agency)

American Federation of Government Employees, Local 4055 (Union) and United States Department of the Army, Headquarters, Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (Agency)

[ v57 p656 ]

57 FLRA No. 128

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 4055
(Union)

and

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WASHINGTON, D.C.
(Agency)

0-AR-3464

_____

DECISION

December 17, 2001

_____

Before the Authority: Dale Cabaniss, Chairman, and
Carol Waller Pope and Tony Armendariz, Members

      This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Philip F. Dorman 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. [n*] 

      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 AFGE, Local 1840, 45 FLRA 497, 499 (1992) (award not deficient as contrary to law where excepting party fails to specify law on which the party relies); United States 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 [ v57 p657 ] represent a plausible interpretation of the agreement; or evidences a manifest disregard of the agreement); United States Dep't of the Air Force, Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colo., 48 FLRA 589, 593-94 (1993) (award not deficient as based on a nonfact where excepting party either challenges a factual matter that the parties disputed at arbitration or fails to demonstrate that a central fact underlying the award is clearly erroneous, but for which a different result would have been reached by the arbitrator).

      Accordingly, the Union's exceptions are denied.

Footnote * for 57 FLRA No. 128

   The Union also excepts to an award of this same Arbitrator issued on December 30, 2000. However, the Union's exceptions pertaining to that award are dismissed as they are untimely. 5 U.S.C. § 7122(b).