Click here to view the decision.
60 FLRA No. 71
SSA, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee and AFGE, Local 3438 (Howell, Arbitrator) 0-AR- 3813 (Decided October 19, 2004)
The Arbitrator found that the Agency violated the parties' agreement when it refused to pay the travel expenses and per diem incurred by the grievant for the final walk through inspection for a relocated SSA field office in Lawrenceburg, Tennessee. As a remedy, the Arbitrator directed that the Agency pay for such expenses as required by the Master Agreement. No exceptions were filed to that award. It was later determined that the grievant did not attend the final walk through inspection, although the parties disputed whether that information was presented at the arbitration hearing. Upon a request of the Union, which was opposed by the Agency, the Arbitrator issued a supplemental award finding that if the grievant makes a final walk through inspection on behalf of the Union, he is to be reimbursed through the Agency's issuance of travel orders to the grievant. The Authority set aside the supplemental award.
The Authority construed the Agency's argument that the Arbitrator engaged in improper ex parte communications with the Union as a claim that the Arbitrator was biased. To establish that an award is deficient because of bias, a party must establish that the award was procured by improper means, that there was partiality or corruption on the part of the arbitrator, or that the arbitrator engaged in misconduct that prejudiced the rights of the party. In this case, the Authority concluded that the Agency failed to establish that the Arbitrator was biased.
However, the Authority concluded that the Arbitrator was functus officio. Under the principle of functus officio, once an arbitrator has accomplished the resolution of the matter submitted, the arbitrator is without further authority. Accordingly, unless an arbitrator retains jurisdiction after issuance of the award, the arbitrator has no authority to take any further action without the joint request of the parties. However, the Authority has consistently held that an arbitrator may clarify an ambiguous award if the clarification conforms to the arbitrator's original findings. An arbitrator may also correct clerical mistakes or obvious errors in arithmetical computations. In this case, as the Arbitrator impermissibly modified an award without a joint request of the parties, the Authority found that the supplemental award was deficient under the principle of functus officio and set it aside.