U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART III— EMPLOYEES › Subpart Subpart F— Labor-Management and Employee Relations › Chapter CHAPTER 71— LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER III— GRIEVANCES, APPEALS, AND REVIEW

5 U.S.C. § 7122

Exceptions to arbitral awards

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(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.(b) If no exception to an arbitrator’s award is filed under subsection (a) of this section during the 30-day period beginning on the date the award is served on the party, the award shall be final and binding. An agency shall take the actions required by an arbitrator’s final award. The award may include the payment of backpay (as provided in section 5596 of this title).(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title VII, § 701, Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1212; amended Pub. L. 98–224, § 4, Mar. 2, 1984, 98 Stat. 48.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–224 amended subsec. (b) generally, substituting “beginning on the date the award is served on the party” for “beginning on the date of such award”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 1101 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Jacqueline A. Tommas Griffith v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 842 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jacqueline A. Tommas Griffith v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 842 F.2d 487 (D.C. Cir. 1988). · cites it 4× “The IRS filed exceptions with the FLRA pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (1982), and prevailed there.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Afl-Cio, Local 3090 v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 777 F.2d 751 (D.C. Cir. 1985). · cites it 6× “5 The charge alleged that the Home’s refusal violated 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (b) which requires government agencies to comply with final arbitration awards, 6 and that this violation constituted an unfair labor practice within the meaning of 5 U.”
Dep't of the Air Force v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Amicus Curiae on Behalf Of, 775 F.2d 727 (6th Cir. 1985). · cites it 8× “This conclusion was based on the findings that a failure to implement an award could not constitute an unfair labor practice until the award is final and binding, and that the award in this case did not become final until June 19, 1980, when the 30-day period specified in 5…”
Nat'l Ass'n of Gov't Employees v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 830 F. Supp. 889 (E.D. Va. 1993). · cites it 8× “1 Timely exceptions to this award were filed with the Authority on May 3,1990 by the Navy pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7122 . The exceptions were docketed by the Authority as U.”
United States Dep't of Navy v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 665 F.3d 1339 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “See 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a). As relevant here, the Navy challenged the award on the grounds that (1) the arbitrator refused to consider its argument that federal appropriations law precluded it from providing bottled water, and (2) the arbitrator’s findings drew no distinction…”
Savas Suzal v. Dir., United States Info. Agency, 32 F.3d 574 (D.C. Cir. 1994). · cites it 3× “at 1470; see 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a). But in cases of major adverse actions that the aggrieved employee could have appealed directly to the MSPB, the arbitrator’s decision is subject to the review provisions that would have applied to an MSPB decision.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 1923 v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 675 F.2d 612 (4th Cir. 1982). · cites it 2× “§ 4302 (a), which provides that each agency should establish a performance appraisal system, it sought review by the Authority pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a). The Authority sustained Social Security’s position.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 446 v. Principi, 404 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 2005). · cites it 3× “Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (b), the VAMC had 30 days, or until February 1, 2000, to file exceptions to the arbitrator’s award with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (“FLRA”), after which time the award became final and binding.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Nicholson, 475 F.3d 341 (D.C. Cir. 2007). · cites it 3× “” 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a). But, “[i]f no exception to an arbitrator’s award is filed .”
Dep't of the Treasury, Off. of Chief Couns. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., Nat'l Treasury Employees Union, Intervenor, 873 F.2d 1467 (D.C. Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “The uniformity problem is compounded, because normally arbitrators’ decisions under the LMRS may be appealed to the FLRA; only matters under chapters 43 and 75 (applying to the competitive service and veterans) must be appealed to the Federal Circuit.”
Nat'l Weather Serv. Employees Org. v. FLRA, 966 F.3d 875 (D.C. Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a)(2); see Am. Fed’n Gov’t Emps.”
Buffkin v. Def., 957 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2020). “648 (1985), held that “Congress clearly intended that an arbitrator 2 5 U.S.C. § 7122 (a) provides that “[e]ither party to arbitration under this chapter may file with the [FLRA] an exception to any arbitrator’s award .”
Show all 62 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.