Click here to view the decision.
55 FLRA No. 13
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey National Mapping Division Mapping Applications Center and NFFE, Local 1309 0-AR-2961 (Fasser, Jr., Arbitrator), (Decided December 31, 1998)
The Arbitrator considered a grievance concerning performance appraisals for transferred employees and an information request regarding performance appraisal procedures. The Arbitrator sustained the grievance in part. The Authority concluded that the Agency's exceptions failed to establish that the award was deficient, and denied the exceptions.
Preliminarily, the Authority rejected the allegation that the award failed to draws its essence from the agreement. The Authority also rejected the allegation that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority. The Authority noted that an arbitrator exceeds his or her authority when the arbitrator fails to resolve an issue submitted to arbitration, disregards specific limitations on his or her authority, or awards relief to persons who are not encompassed within the grievance.
The Authority added that, like the Federal courts, it will accord an arbitrator's interpretation of a submission agreement and an arbitrator's formulation of the issue submitted in the absence of a stipulation the same substantial deference accorded an arbitrator's interpretation and application of the collective bargaining agreement
The Authority noted that here the parties did not stipulate the issues to be resolved, thus allowing the Arbitrator to formulate the issues in his award. The Authority found that the award, including the remedy, was directly responsive to the issues raised at arbitration, as formulated by the Arbitrator. Consequently, the Arbitrator did not exceed his authority by formulating the performance appraisal issue and providing the affected employees a remedy.
The Authority also found no merit to the Agency's argument that the Arbitrator's remedial order allowing for future grievances filed on behalf of individual employees disregarded the limitations of the grievance. The record established that although the grievance was on behalf of the bargaining unit, it also concerned the ability of the Union to address the concerns of individual employees. Thus, the Authority noted that the remedy was also responsive to the issues as framed by the Arbitrator and was within the limitations of the grievance. Accordingly, that exception was also denied.