[ v05 p254 ]
05:0254(32)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
5 FLRA No. 32 COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Agency and NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CSA LOCALS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO Union Case No. 0-AR-158 DECISION THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON EXCEPTIONS TO THE AWARD /1/ OF ARBITRATOR SEYMOUR STRONGIN FILED BY THE UNION UNDER SECTION 7122(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7122(A)). ACCORDING TO THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD, THE DISPUTE IN THIS MATTER AROSE WHEN THE AGENCY POSTED AND FILLED AT ITS REGIONAL OFFICES CERTAIN TEMPORARY POSITIONS AS SCHEDULE A EXCEPTED SERVICE POSITIONS UNDER THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED IN SECTION 213.3199(B) OF TITLE 5 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. /2/ PRIOR TO POSTING THE POSITIONS AND BECAUSE OF THE NEED TO EXPEDITIOUSLY FILL THEM, THE AGENCY SECURED FROM THE UNION ITS AGREEMENT TO WAIVE THE NORMAL 10-DAY POSTING PERIOD AND IN ITS PLACE SUBSTITUTE A SHORTER POSTING PERIOD. NOTICES WERE POSTED AND APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FROM AGENCY EMPLOYEES AND OTHERS. THE AGENCY MADE ITS SELECTIONS AND FILLED THE POSITIONS PRIMARILY WITH APPLICANTS FROM OUTSIDE THE AGENCY. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE UNION FILED GRIEVANCES ON BEHALF OF NONSELECTED AGENCY EMPLOYEES IN ITS ATLANTA AND BOSTON REGIONAL OFFICES. THE GRIEVANCES ALLEGED THAT FILLING THE VACANCIES WITH OUTSIDE APPLICANTS VIOLATED ARTICLE 12, SECTION 4(C)(3) OF THE PARTIES' COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WHICH REQUIRES THAT COMPETITIVE MERIT PROCEDURES BE USED FOR TEMPORARY PROMOTIONS OF MORE THAN 60 DAYS. THE GRIEVANCES ALSO ALLEGED THAT SCHEDULE A AUTHORITY WAS NOT PROPERLY EXERCISED BECAUSE ONE OF THE PRECONDITIONS TO ITS USE IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS THAT THE POSITIONS FILLED BE THOSE FOR WHICH OTHER STAFFING RESOURCES OR AUTHORITIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITHIN THE AGENCY, A CONDITION WHICH ALLEGEDLY WAS NOT MET. IN ADDITION, IN THE BOSTON GRIEVANCE THE UNION ALLEGED THAT THE AGENCY IMPROPERLY FAILED TO GRANT THE GRIEVANT VETERAN'S PREFERENCE POINTS AND THAT IT ERRONEOUSLY FAILED TO FORMALLY RANK THE APPLICANTS FOR THE POSITIONS. BOTH GRIEVANCES WERE SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION. IN DENYING THE GRIEVANCES, THE ARBITRATOR FOUND NO VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 12, SECTION 4(C)(3) OF THE AGREEMENT SINCE THE COVERAGE OF THAT PROVISION WAS LIMITED TO "THE COMPETITIVE SERVICE FOR EMPLOYEES IN THE BARGAINING UNIT." THUS, BECAUSE THE POSITIONS AT ISSUE INVOLVED SCHEDULE A EXCEPTED SERVICE APPOINTMENTS, THE ARBITRATOR CONCLUDED ARTICLE 12, SECTION 4(C)(3) OF THE PARTIES' AGREEMENT WAS NOT APPLICABLE. AS TO THE UNION'S CONTENTION THAT ONE OF THE PRECONDITIONS TO THE USE OF THE SCHEDULE A APPOINTING AUTHORITY FOR TEMPORARY ORGANIZATIONS HAD NOT BEEN MET, I.E., THAT OTHER STAFFING RESOURCES OR AUTHORITIES WITHIN THE AGENCY NOT BE AVAILABLE, THE ARBITRATOR OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS "AN ABSENCE OF GUIDANCE FROM THE PARTIES" AS TO HOW THIS CONDITION SHOULD BE APPLIED. THEREFORE HE FORMULATED AND APPLIED A "RULE OF REASON," DETERMINING THE PRECONDITION TO BE MET IF THE AGENCY COULD ONLY DETAIL INCUMBENT EMPLOYEES TO THE POSITIONS AT SERIOUS COST TO ITS OWN REGULAR OPERATIONS. HOWEVER, THE ARBITRATOR FOUND THAT IN ANY EVENT THE UNION HAD FAILED TO OBJECT WHEN THE AGENCY INFORMED IT THAT THE SCHEDULE A AUTHORITY WOULD BE UTILIZED FOR THE POSITIONS, AND THEREFORE THAT THE SCHEDULE A APPOINTING AUTHORITY HAD BEEN PROPERLY UTILIZED. IN ADDITION, IN THE BOSTON GRIEVANCE THE ARBITRATOR ALSO FOUND THAT THE GRIEVANT WAS NOT ENTITLED TO VETERAN'S PREFERENCE POINTS UNDER THE AGENCY'S SELECTION PROCEDURES IN FILLING "TEMPORARY EMERGENCY-TYPE POSITIONS" LIKE THE ONES IN DISPUTE. FINALLY, THE ARBITRATOR CONCLUDED THAT, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ABSENCE OF A FORMAL RANKING OF THE BOSTON APPLICANTS, EVEN ASSUMING THAT RANKING WAS REQUIRED IN FILLING TEMPORARY POSITIONS, WAS NOT PREJUDICIAL TO THE GRIEVANT. THEREFORE, THE ARBITRATOR DENIED THE GRIEVANCES. THE UNION FILED EXCEPTIONS TO THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD UNDER SECTION 7122(A) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE /3/ AND PART 2425 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS, 5 CFR PART 2425. THE AGENCY FILED AN OPPOSITION. THE QUESTION BEFORE THE AUTHORITY IS WHETHER, ON THE BASIS OF THE UNION'S EXCEPTIONS, THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IS DEFICIENT BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY TO ANY LAW, RULE, OR REGULATION, OR ON OTHER GROUNDS SIMILAR TO THOSE APPLIED BY FEDERAL COURTS IN PRIVATE SECTOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS CASES. IN ITS FIRST EXCEPTION THE UNION CONTENDS THAT THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IS "CONTRARY TO LAW, RULE AND/OR REGULATION." IN SUPPORT OF THIS EXCEPTION, THE UNION CITES IN GENERAL TERMS TO VARIOUS STATUTORY AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS DEALING WITH THE SCHEDULE A APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND VETERANS' PREFERENCE RIGHTS AND REFERS TO TESTIMONY CONTAINED ON VARIOUS PAGES OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE ARBITRATION HEARING. THE UNION'S FIRST EXCEPTION, THAT THE AWARD IS CONTRARY TO LAW, RULE OR REGULATION, STATES IN GENERAL TERMS A GROUND ON WHICH THE AUTHORITY WILL FIND AN AWARD DEFICIENT UNDER SECTION 7122(A)(1) OF THE STATUTE. HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE THE UNION DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE IN ITS EXCEPTION HOW THE AWARD IS CONTRARY TO LAW, RULE OR REGULATION. THUS, OTHER THAN TO CITE IN GENERAL TERMS TO THE "RIGHTS OF (AGENCY) EMPLOYEES . . . TO MERIT PROMOTION AND A COMPETITIVE PROCESS" UNDER THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT, AND TO VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL AND TITLE 5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE, THE UNION HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED HOW THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD, DENYING THE GRIEVANCES OVER THE AGENCY'S FILLING OF CERTAIN TEMPORARY SCHEDULE A POSITIONS, IS CONTRARY TO ANY SPECIFIC LAWS OR REGULATIONS. INSTEAD, IT IS CLEAR FROM THE UNION'S REFERENCES TO VARIOUS TESTIMONY IN THE HEARING RECORD AND TO CERTAIN FINDINGS MADE BY THE ARBITRATOR THAT THE UNION IS ATTEMPTING TO RELITIGATE THE MERITS OF THE GRIEVANCE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY. SUCH ASSERTIONS PROVIDE NO BASIS FOR FINDING AN AWARD DEFICIENT. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2284, 3 FLRA NO. 35(1980). THEREFORE, THE UNION'S FIRST EXCEPTION PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR FINDING THE AWARD DEFICIENT UNDER 5 U.S.C. 7122(A) AND SECTION 2425.3 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. IN ITS SECOND EXCEPTION, THE UNION CONTENDS THAT THE ARBITRATOR EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORITY. IN SUPPORT OF THIS EXCEPTION THE UNION ASSERTS THAT THE ARBITRATOR EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORITY WHEN HE APPLIED A "RULE OF REASON" IN "THE ABSENCE OF ANY GUIDANCE FROM THE PARTIES" AS TO HOW ONE OF THE REGULATORY PRECONDITIONS TO USING SCHEDULE A AUTHORITY FOR FILLING TEMPORARY POSITIONS SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED. INSTEAD, THE UNION ASSERTS, THE ARBITRATOR SHOULD ONLY HAVE APPLIED "RULES" REGARDING MERIT PROMOTION AND COMPETITIVE PROCEDURES. THE UNION'S SECOND EXCEPTION, THAT THE ARBITRATOR EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORITY, STATES A GROUND UPON WHICH THE AUTHORITY WILL FIND AN AWARD DEFICIENT UNDER SECTION 7122(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE AND LOCAL 1778, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, 3 FLRA NO. 38(1980). HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE THE UNION HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ARBITRATOR IN ANY MANNER EXCEEDED HIS AUTHORITY WHEN, IN ADDRESSING ONE OF THE QUESTIONS BEFORE HIM OF WHETHER CERTAIN REGULATORY PRECONDITIONS HAD BEEN MET, HE FORMULATED A "RULE OF REASON" FOR APPLYING THE REGULATION IN THE ABSENCE OF OTHER GUIDANCE FROM THE PARTIES. INSTEAD, THE UNION'S ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS EXCEPTION CONSTITUTE DISAGREEMENT WITH THE ARBITRATOR'S REASONING AND CONCLUSION IN RESOLVING THE MATTER BEFORE HIM. THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS FOR FINDING AN AWARD DEFICIENT. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1923, AFL-CIO AND SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, HEADQUARTERS BUREAUS AND OFFICES, 4 FLRA NO. 19(1980). THEREFORE, THE UNION'S SECOND EXCEPTION PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR FINDING THE AWARD DEFICIENT UNDER 5 U.S.C. 7122(A) AND SECTION 2425.3 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS. FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 2425.4 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS, WE HEREBY SUSTAIN THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD. ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., MARCH 9, 1981 RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ THE MATTER BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR INVOLVED TWO SEPARATE GRIEVANCES WITH SIMILAR ISSUES. THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARDS AS TO EACH OF THOSE GRIEVANCES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AS SINGLE AWARD BY THE UNION IN ITS EXCEPTIONS AND WILL BE SIMILARLY TREATED FOR PURPOSES OF THIS DECISION. /2/ 5 CFR 213.3199(B)(1980) PROVIDES THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE EMPLOYEES FOR THE SCHEDULE A EXCEPTED SERVICE TO FILL: POSITIONS AT GS-15 AND BELOW ON THE STAFFS OF TEMPORARY ORGANIZATIONS ESTABLISHED WITHIN CONTINUING AGENCIES WHEN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET: (1) THE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION IS ESTABLISHED BY AN AUTHORITY OUTSIDE THE AGENCY, USUALLY BY LAW OR EXECUTIVE ORDER; (2) THE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION IS ESTABLISHED FOR AN INITIAL PERIOD OF 4 YEARS OR LESS AND, IF SUBSEQUENTLY EXTENDED, ITS TOTAL LIFE INCLUDING EXTENSION(S) WILL NOT EXCEED 4 YEARS; (3) THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY THE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION IS OUTSIDE THE AGENCY'S CONTINUING RESPONSIBILITIES; AND (4) THE POSITIONS FILLED UNDER THIS AUTHORITY ARE THOSE FOR WHICH OTHER STAFFING RESOURCES OR AUTHORITIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITHIN THE AGENCY. AN AGENCY MAY USE THIS AUTHORITY TO FILL POSITIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS WHICH DO NOT MEET ALL OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS OR TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS AND POSITION CHANGES IN A SINGLE ORGANIZATION DURING A PERIOD LONGER THAN 4 YEARS ONLY WITH PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE (OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT). /3/ 5 U.S.C. 7122(A) PROVIDES: (A) EITHER PARTY TO ARBITRATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER MAY FILE WITH THE AUTHORITY AN EXCEPTION TO ANY ARBITRATOR'S AWARD PURSUANT TO THE ARBITRATION (OTHER THAN AN AWARD RELATING TO A MATTER DESCRIBED IN SECTION 7121(F) OF THIS TITLE). IF UPON REVIEW THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE AWARD IS DEFICIENT-- (1) BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY TO ANY LAW, RULE, OR REGULATION; OR (2) ON OTHER GROUNDS SIMILAR TO THOSE APPLIED BY FEDERAL COURTS IN PRIVATE SECTOR LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS; THE AUTHORITY MAY TAKE SUCH ACTION AND MAKE SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING THE AWARD AS IT CONSIDERS NECESSARY, CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE LAWS, RULES OR REGULATIONS.