---

 10 FLRA No. 57
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 LOCAL 3272
 Union
 
 and
 
 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
 AREAS VIII & XIV, CHICAGO
 REGION, BRANCH OFFICE,
 HOLLAND, MICHIGAN
 Activity
 
                                            Case No. O-AR-205
 
                                 DECISION
 
    THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON EXCEPTIONS TO THE AWARD OF
 ARBITRATOR SAMUEL S. SHAW FILED BY THE UNION UNDER SECTION 7122(A) OF
 THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (THE STATUTE) AND
 PART 2425 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS.  THE AGENCY FILED AN
 OPPOSITION.
 
    THE DISPUTE IN THIS MATTER CONCERNS THE SEPARATION OF THE GRIEVANT
 DURING HER PROBATIONARY PERIOD.  A GRIEVANCE WAS FILED PROTESTING THE
 SEPARATION THAT WAS ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION.
 
    ON THE BASIS OF THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY PRESENTED, THE ARBITRATOR
 CONCLUDED THAT IT HAD NOT BEEN SHOWN THAT MANAGEMENT'S APPRAISAL OF THE
 GRIEVANT'S COMPETENCE AND PROGRESS AS NOT WARRANTING HER CONTINUED
 EMPLOYMENT WAS ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, OR DISCRIMINATORY.  THEREFORE, AS
 HIS AWARD ON THE MERITS THE ARBITRATOR DENIED THE GRIEVANCE.
 
    IN ITS EXCEPTIONS TO THE AWARD, THE UNION PRINCIPALLY CONTENDS THAT
 THE AWARD IS DEFICIENT BECAUSE THE ACTIVITY IN ITS SEPARATION ACTION
 VIOLATED PROVISIONS OF LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ARBITRATOR WAS REQUIRED
 TO OVERRULE THE GRIEVANT'S SEPARATION.  SPECIFICALLY, THE UNION CONTENDS
 THAT THE ACTIVITY VIOLATED THE PRIVACY ACT BY MAINTAINING ILLEGAL
 RECORDS AND DATA ON THE GRIEVANT'S WORK PERFORMANCE AND VIOLATED
 PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE BY IMPLEMENTING NEW PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR
 THE GRIEVANT WITHOUT NOTIFYING AND BARGAINING WITH THE UNION AND BY
 HOLDING A FORMAL DISCUSSION WITHOUT NOTIFYING THE UNION.
 
    THE UNION IN THESE EXCEPTIONS HAS PROVIDED NO BASIS ON WHICH TO FIND
 THE AWARD DEFICIENT.  THE UNION HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED IN WHAT MANNER
 DOCUMENTATION OF THE GRIEVANT'S PERFORMANCE DURING HER PROBATIONARY
 PERIOD CONSTITUTED A VIOLATION OF THE PRIVACY ACT.  MOREOVER, THIS
 ARGUMENT WAS MADE TO THE ARBITRATOR AND HE EXPRESSLY DETERMINED THAT THE
 PROPRIETY OF THE GREIVANT'S SEPARATION WAS ADEQUATELY SUPPORTED WITHOUT
 REFERENCE TO ANY RECORDS OR DATA THAT MAY HAVE BEEN PROCEDURALLY
 DEFICIENT.  LIKEWISE THE UNION HAS NOT ESTABLISHED FOR PURPOSES OF
 DETERMINING THAT THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD IS CONTRARY TO THE STATUTE THAT
 THE ARBITRATOR, IN DENYING THE GRIEVANCE, SANCTIONED VIOLATIONS BY THE
 ACTIVITY OF PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE CONSTITUTING UNFAIR LABOR
 PRACTICES.  THE UNION'S UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATIONS OF CERTAIN CONDUCT
 BY THE ACTIVITY WHICH ASSERTEDLY CONSTITUTED VIOLATIONS OF THE STATUTE
 AND UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES CANNOT ESTABLISH, AND THE ARBITRATOR'S AWARD
 AND THE RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY DO NOT EVIDENCE, THAT SUCH
 VIOLATIONS WERE AS A MATTER OF LAW COMMITTED.  CONSEQUENTLY NO BASIS FOR
 FINDING THE AWARD DEFICIENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 7122(A) OF
 THE STATUTE IS PROVIDED.
 
    IN ITS EXCEPTIONS THE UNION ALSO CONTENDS THAT THE AWARD IS DEFICIENT
 ON SEVERAL GROUNDS BECAUSE THE ARBITRATOR DISREGARDED THE BROAD MEANING
 OF THE FAIRNESS AND EQUITY PROVISION OF THE PARTIES' COLLECTIVE
 BARGAINING AGREEMENT WHEN HE APPLIED UNDER THE AGREEMENT A STANDARD OF
 WHETHER THE SEPARATION WAS ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, DISCRIMINATORY, OR
 PATENTLY UNREASONABLE.  THIS CONTENTION HOWEVER CONSTITUTES NOTHING MORE
 THAN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE ARBITRATOR'S INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION
 OF THE PARTIES' AGREEMENT IN RESOLVING THE GRIEVANCE BEFORE HIM AND
 THEREFORE PROVIDES NO BASIS FOR FINDING THE AWARD DEFICIENT.
 ACCORDINGLY, THE UNION'S EXCEPTIONS ARE DENIED.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPTEMBER 30, 1982
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 
 
 
 

---