Click here to view the decision.
55 FLRA No. 183
U.S. Department of Defense, Education Activity, Pensacola, Florida and Fort Campbell Education Association (Sergent, Arbitrator), 0-AR-3152 (Decided November 30, 1999)
The Arbitrator sustained a grievance alleging that the Agency violated a provision in the parties' collective bargaining agreement that required the Agency to increase the wage rates of the grievants by 10 percent. The provision at issue resulted from interest arbitration. The Authority concluded that the Agency failed to establish that the award was deficient under section 7122(a) of the Statute.
The Authority rejected the allegations that the award failed to draw its essence from the agreement and the Arbitrator exceeded his authority. The Authority rejected the Agency's contention that the award was contrary to section 7116 of the Statute. The Authority explained that although failure to comply with a Panel arbitrator's award constitutes an unfair labor practice pursuant to section 7116(a)(6), this does not lead to the conclusion that a dispute over the interpretation of a provision ordered by the Panel cannot be considered as a grievance under a negotiated grievance procedure. The Authority explained that the statutory definition of grievance includes any complaint concerning the interpretation of an agreement. The fact that a particular contract provision resulted from interest arbitration does not mean that the provision is not part of an agreement. As such, the Authority noted that it has routinely considered arbitration exceptions to awards resolving grievances concerning the interpretation of Panel-imposed contract provisions.
The Authority also rejected the Agency's contention that the Union was required to file exceptions to the Panel arbitrator's award under section 7122(a) of the Statute. The Authority explained that it has held that exceptions may not be filed to a Panel-ordered interest arbitration award issued pursuant to section 7119(b)(1) of the Statute, such as the Panel arbitration award at issue here. Therefore, the Agency's argument that the Union should have filed such exceptions was without merit. Also rejected was the allegation that the award was based on a nonfact.