[ v02 p99 ]
02:0099(9)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
2 FLRA No. 9 VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL, DALLAS, TEXAS and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2437 FLRC No. 78A-120 DECISION ON APPEAL FROM ARBITRATION AWARD BACKGROUND OF CASE ACCORDING TO THE ARBITRATOR, THE DISPUTE IN THIS MATTER AROSE WHEN THE ACTIVITY FILLED A VACANCY FOR THE POSITION OF PAINTER, WG-9, FROM A CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES WITHOUT POSTING THE VACANCY. THE UNION CONTENDED THAT THE GRIEVANT AND OTHER INTERESTED ACTIVITY EMPLOYEES DID NOT KNOW OF THE VACANCY AND CONSEQUENTLY COULD NOT BID ON IT AND THAT THE GRIEVANT WAS QUALIFIED AS A PAINTER AND COULD HAVE FILLED THE POSITION. A GRIEVANCE WAS FILED WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD ACCORDING TO THE ARBITRATOR, THE ISSUE BEFORE HIM WAS: DID THE HOSPITAL VIOLATE THE AGREEMENT IN FILLING A WG-9 PAINTER VACANCY WITHOUT ANNOUNCING THE VACANCY ON THE STATION? IF THE ANSWER IS "YES" WHAT WILL BE THE REMEDY? THE ARBITRATOR DETERMINED THAT THE ACTIVITY HAD VIOLATED ARTICLE XI, SECTION 7(A) AND (C)(1) OF THE PARTIES' COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT /1/ BY NOT POSTING THE VACANCY SINCE ALL INTERESTED EMPLOYEES HAD THUS NOT BEEN GIVEN "FULL AND FAIR CONSIDERATION" FOR ADVANCEMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ARBITRATOR AWARDED AS FOLLOWS: THE HOSPITAL WILL IMMEDIATELY OFFER TO: 1. VACATE THE WG-9 POSITION AND ORDER A NEW PERSONNEL ACTION FOR WG-9 PAINTER. 2. POST THE VACANCY FOR 10 CALENDAR DAYS ON 2 OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARDS ON THE STATION AND ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION FROM THE EMPLOYEES THAT WERE ON THE STATION ON FEBRUARY 26, 1978. 3. IF THERE ARE NOT 3 OR MORE HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES ON THE PROMOTION CERTIFICATE, THE HOSPITAL MAY ENLARGE THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION TO INCLUDE A CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES AND MANAGEMENT MAY MAKE A SELECTION FROM THE COMBINED LIST OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES ON THE PROMOTION CERTIFICATE, IF THERE ARE ANY, AND THE HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES ON THE CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES. AGENCY'S APPEAL TO THE AUTHORITY THE AGENCY FILED A PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS COUNCIL. THIS CASE WAS PENDING BEFORE THE COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 31, 1978. IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2400.5 OF THE TRANSITION RULES OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (44 FED. REG. 44741) AND SECTION 7135(B) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (92 STAT. 1215), THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COUNCIL, 5 C.F.R. PART 2411 (1978), REMAIN OPERATIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE PRESENT CASE, EXCEPT THAT THE WORD "AUTHORITY" IS SUBSTITUTED, AS APPROPRIATE, WHEREVER THE WORD "COUNCIL" APPEARS IN SUCH RULES. PURSUANT TO SECTION 2411.32 OF THE RULES AS SO AMENDED, THE AUTHORITY ACCEPTED THE AGENCY'S PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD INSOFAR AS IT RELATED TO THE AGENCY'S EXCEPTION WHICH ALLEGED THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES THE FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL. /2/ THE UNION FILED A BRIEF ON THE MERITS. OPINION SECTION 2411.37(A) OF THE AMENDED RULES PROVIDED: (A) AN AWARD OF AN ARBITRATOR SHALL BE MODIFIED, SET ASIDE IN WHOLE OR IN PART, OR REMANDED ONLY ON GROUNDS THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES APPLICABLE LAW, APPROPRIATE REGULATION, OR THE ORDER, OR OTHER SIMILAR TO THOSE APPLIED BY THE COURTS IN PRIVATE SECTOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS. AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, THE AUTHORITY ACCEPTED THE AGENCY'S PETITION FOR REVIEW INSOFAR AS IT RELATED TO THE AGENCY'S EXCEPTION WHICH ALLEGED THAT THE AWARD VIOLATES THE FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL. SINCE THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE MATTERS INVOLVED HEREIN, AND SINCE UNDER SECTION 902(B) OF THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 1978 (92 STAT. 1224) THIS APPEAL MUST BE RESOLVED AS IF THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT HAD NOT BEEN ENACTED, THE AUTHORITY REQUESTED FROM THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT (THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO THE MATTERS INVOLVED HEREIN) AN INTERPRETATION OF THE RELEVANT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION REGULATIONS AS THEY RELATE TO THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IN THIS CASE. THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT REPLIED IN RELEVANT PART AS FOLLOWS: THIS CASE INVOLVED A GRIEVANCE OVER MANAGEMENT'S FAILURE TO POST A VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT FOR A WG-9 PAINTER POSITION, IN ACCORD WITH A CONTRACT PROVISION. THE ARBITRATOR FOUND THAT THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HAD VIOLATED THE CONTRACT PROVISION BY NOT POSTING , AND HAD FILLED THE POSITION BY REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES FROM THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND SELECTING AN INDIVIDUAL FROM THE CERTIFICATE FOR THE POSITION. AT ISSUE HEREIN IS THE THREE-PART ARBITRATION AWARD REQUIRING THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION TO: (1) VACATE THE POSITION AND ORDER A NEW PERSONNEL ACTION TO FILL THE POSITION; (2) POST A VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE POSITION SO VACATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CONTRACTUAL PROVISIONS; AND (3) "ENLARGE THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION TO INCLUDE A CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES" ONLY IF POSTING THE VACANCY YIELDS LESS THAN THREE HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES, AND THEN SELECT OR NOT SELECT FROM THE COMBINED LISTS OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES. FROM THE STANDPOINT OF CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME, TWO ISSUES ARISE IN THIS CASE: (1) WHETHER AS PART OF AN ARBITRATION AWARD IN A CHALLENGED PROMOTION ACTION AN EMPLOYEE MAY BE REMOVED FROM A POSITION IN ADVANCE OF OTHER CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN; AND (2) WHETHER AN ARBITRATION AWARD MAY LIMIT THE USE OF A CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES IN FILLING VACANCIES. THESE ISSUES RELATE TO PART 1 AND PART 3 OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD, RESPECTIVELY. THE PORTIONS OF PARTS 1 AND 2 OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD WHICH ORDER THAT THE PROMOTION ACTION BE RERUN AND THAT MANAGEMENT FULFILL ITS CONTRACTUAL POSTING OBLIGATION, DO NOT CONFLICT WITH CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION RULES OR REGULATIONS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE FILLING OF THE POSITION, OR OF THE AWARD. THE FIRST ISSUE, REGARDING WHETHER THE ARBITRATOR MAY ORDER THE POSITION HEREIN TO BE VACATED, MUST BE ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. FPM CHAPTER 335-6-4B STATES THAT AN ERRONEOUSLY PROMOTED EMPLOYEE "MAY BE RETAINED IN THE POSITION ONLY IF RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROMOTION ACTION SHOWS THAT HE COULD HAVE BEEN SELECTED HAD THE PROPER PROCEDURE BEEN FOLLOWED AT THE TIME THE ACTION WAS TAKEN." AN EMPLOYEE, THEREFORE, SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED FROM A POSITION IN ADVANCE OF CORRECTIVE ACTION BEING TAKEN UNLESS IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY AN ARBITRATOR OR OTHER COMPETENT AUTHORITY THAT THE EMPLOYEE/INCUMBENT COULD NOT PROPERLY HAVE BEEN SELECTED FOR THE POSITION. MANY CASES DECIDED BY THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS COUNCIL REFLECT AND APPLY THIS WELL-ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLE BASED ON FPM REGULATIONS. (DEFENSE MAPPING AGENCY, HYDROGRAPHIC CENTER, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND AFGE LOCAL 3407 FLRC 75A-33; ADJUTANT GENERAL, STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE AND GRANITE STATE CHAPTER, ASSOCIATION OF TECHNICIANS, FLRC 76A-95; COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CSA LOCALS AFGE, FLRC 76A-154.) IN THE IMMEDIATE CASE, THERE IS NO FINDING THAT THE INCUMBENT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN PROPERLY CONSIDERED FOR THE POSITION. IN FACT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, ANY SUCH FINDING WOULD HAVE VIOLATED APPLICABLE REGULATION, SPECIFICALLY CIVIL SERVICE RULE 7.1 WHICH MAINTAINED AGENCY DISCRETION IN THE FILLING OF VACANCIES AND PROVIDED: IN HIS DISCRETION, AN APPOINTING OFFICER MAY FILL ANY POSITION IN THE COMPETITIVE SERVICE EITHER BY COMPETITIVE APPOINTMENT FROM A CIVIL SERVICE REGISTER OR BY NON-COMPETITIVE SELECTION OF A PRESENT OR FORMER FEDERAL EMPLOYEE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS. THUS, THE PART OF THE AWARD ORDERING THAT THE INCUMBENT BE REMOVED VIOLATED APPLICABLE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS. THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED HEREIN REGARDING WHETHER THE USE OF A CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES MAY BE LIMITED, IS MORE COMPLEX. IT WOULD APPEAR THAT, AS WRITTEN, THE ARBITRATION AWARD VIOLATES CIVIL SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND THE QUESTION POSED IN THIS ISSUE THEREFORE MUST ALSO BE ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. THE POSSIBLE CONFUSION WHICH EXISTS GOES TO THE PART OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD WHICH STATES THAT "IF THERE ARE NOT 3 OR MORE HIGHLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES ON THE PROMOTION CERTIFICATE, THE HOSPITAL MAY ENLARGE THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION TO INCLUDE A CIVIL SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES . . . " WHILE IT IS NOT DIRECTLY STATED, THE ARBITRATOR APPEARS TO BE EQUATING THE USE OF A CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES WITH ENLARGING THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION. IF THE ARBITRATOR MEANT MERELY TO LIMIT THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION (REGARDING WHICH A CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES HAS NOT RELEVANCE SINCE IT IS AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF CANDIDATES, NOT PART OF AN AREA OF CONSIDERATION, AND NEITHER IMPACTS UPON NOR IS IMPACTED BY THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION), HIS AWARD IN PART 3 WOULD NOT VIOLATE COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS. IN OTHER WORDS, AREA OF CONSIDERATION IS A TERM OF ART WITH RESPECT TO FILLING POSITIONS FROM WITHIN. THE SCOPE OF THE AREA OF CONSIDERATION MAY BE LIMITED OR EXPANDED BY CONTRACTUAL PROVISION. RULE 7.1, CITED ABOVE, HOWEVER, WILL RETAIN TO MANAGEMENT THE RIGHT TO TURN TO ALL ALTERNATE SOURCES, IN THIS CASE A CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBLES, /3/ TO FILL POSITIONS. IF, HOWEVER, THROUGH MISUNDERSTANDING OR INTENT, THE ARBITRATOR MEANT TO LIMIT MANAGEMENT'S RIGHT TO USE ALTERNATE STAFFING METHODS IN MAKING SELECTIONS, PART 3 OF THE AWARD CLEARLY VIOLATES CIVIL SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS. CONCLUSION BASED UPON THE FOREGOING INTERPRETATION OF THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, WE FIND THAT THE PORTION OF PART 1 OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD WHICH DIRECTS THE ACTIVITY TO "(V)ACATE THE WG-9 POSITION" VIOLATES APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE MUST BE SET ASIDE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2411.37(B) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, WE MODIFY PART 1 OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD BY STRIKING THE FOLLOWING WORDS: "VACATE THE WG-9 POSITION AND." AS SO MODIFIED, PART 1 OF THE AWARD IS SUSTAINED. IN ADDITION, BASED ON THE FOREGOING INTERPRETATION OF THE OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 2411.37(B) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, WE MODIFY PART 3 OF THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD BY ADDING THERETO THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE: "NOTHING IN THIS AWARD SHALL LIMIT THE HOSPITAL'S RIGHT TO USE ALTERNATE STAFFING METHODS IN MAKING SELECTION." AS SO MODIFIED, PART 3 OF THE AWARD IS SUSTAINED. /4/ THE STAY PREVIOUSLY GRANTED IS VACATED. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., NOVEMBER 15, 1979 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY /1/ ACCORDINGLY TO THE ARBITRATOR, ARTICLE XI, SECTION 7(A) AND (C)(1) PROVIDES, IN RELEVANT PART: ARTICLE XI 7. PROMOTIONS: A. POLICY: THE UNION AND THE HOSPITAL AGREE THAT THE PURPOSES AND INTENT OF THE PROMOTION POLICY ARE TO ENSURE THAT EMPLOYEES OF THE VA ARE GIVEN FULL AND FAIR CONSIDERATION FOR ADVANCEMENT AND TO ENSURE SELECTION FROM AMONG THE BEST QUALIFIED CANDIDATES. . . . . C. PROMOTION ANNOUNCEMENTS (1) IN ORDER TO ASSURE ALL INTERESTED EMPLOYEES CONSIDERATION FOR PROMOTION, THE HOSPITAL SHALL POST LOCAL VACANCIES ON THE TWO OFFICIAL BULLETIN BOARDS FOR TEN CALENDAR DAYS. /2/ THE AGENCY REQUESTED, AND THE AUTHORITY GRANTED, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2411.47(F) OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, A STAY OF THE AWARD PENDING DETERMINATION OF THE APPEAL. /3/ IN ADDITION TO RULE 7.1, FPM CHAPTER 330, SUBCHAPTER 1-1 STATED, IN PART: AN APPOINTING OFFICER MAY CHOOSE THE METHOD TO BE USED FOR FILLING A COMPETITIVE POSITION EXCEPT WHEN THAT CHOICE IS LIMITED BY STATUTE OR THE CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS. /4/ IN CONFORMITY WITH SECTION 902(B) OF THE CIVIL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 1978 (92 STAT. 1224), THE INSTANT CASE WAS DECIDED SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF E.O. 11491, AS AMENDED, AND AS IF THE NEW FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (92 STAT. 1191) HAD NOT BEEN ENACTED. THE DECISION DOES NOT PREJUDGE IN ANY MANNER EITHER THE MEANING OR APPLICATION OF RELATED PROVISIONS OF THE NEW STATUTE OR THE RESULT WHICH WOULD BE REACHED BY THE AUTHORITY IF THE CASE HAD ARISEN UNDER THE STATUTE RATHER THAN THE ORDER.