Tonetti v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, No. 85-7485

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore FAY, JOHNSON and CLARK; PER CURIAM
Citation776 F.2d 929
Parties120 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3400 Lt. Col. Serge TONETTI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent-Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 85-7485
Decision Date30 October 1985

Page 929

776 F.2d 929
120 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3400
Lt. Col. Serge TONETTI, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 85-7485.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
Oct. 30, 1985.

Ruth E. Peters, Sol., Steven H. Svartz, Deputy Sol., Pamela P. Johnson, Washington, D.C., for respondent-appellee.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority.

Before FAY, JOHNSON and CLARK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The petitioner, Lt. Col. Serge Tonetti, seeks review of a final decision of the Federal Labor-Relations Authority (the Authority). In its decision, the Authority denied

Page 930

exceptions to an arbitration award filed, on behalf of Tonetti, by Local 1858, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (the Union). The Union had challenged an arbitrator's award which sustained a one-day disciplinary suspension of Tonetti for his refusal to report to a new work assignment. The Authority has moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that this court has no jurisdiction to review the Authority's decision in this case. We agree and accordingly grant the motion to dismiss.

I.

Tonetti was employed as a General Engineer, GS-13, with the United States Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama (the Agency) and was assigned to the Targets Management Office (TMO) of the Missile Logistics Center when he was suspended. The events leading to his suspension began in March, 1982 when the Agency decided to transfer Tonetti's engineering position from the Army Missile Laboratory (AML) to TMO. The Agency advised Tonetti, by letters in April and June of 1982, of its decision to transfer his position and offered him the reassigned position at TMO, but he neither accepted nor declined the offer. Thereafter, by letter of August 4, 1982, the Agency notified Tonetti of his reassignment to TMO effective August 15, 1982, with a reporting date of August 16. Tonetti then requested, in a letter to the Agency dated August 12, that his transfer from AML to TMO be held in abeyance. Tonetti was granted leave during the week of August 16 and was therefore not required to report to TMO until August 23. On August 23, however, instead of reporting to TMO, Tonetti was allowed to pack his work papers at AML, with the understanding that he would report to his new assignment at TMO the next day or be placed on absence without approved leave (AWOL) status. Tonetti did not pack on August 23 nor did he report for duty at TMO on August 24. As a result, he was carried as AWOL on that date and was subsequently given a one-day disciplinary suspension without pay for failure to follow instructions and for being AWOL.

Tonetti filed a grievance on the one-day suspension which was processed in accordance with the negotiated grievance procedures contained in the 1979 collective bargaining agreement between the Agency and the Union. The grievance was eventually...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, AFL-CI
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • 23 Septiembre 1987
    ...Department of Justice v. FLRA, 792 F.2d 25 (2d Cir.1986); U.S. Marshals Service v. FLRA, 708 F.2d 1417 (9th Cir.1983); Tonetti v. FLRA, 776 F.2d 929 (11th Cir.1985). Even if a violation of Circular A-76 amounted to an unfair labor practice, then, no judicial review would be available. Under......
  • Griffith v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, No. 86-5720
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 25 Marzo 1988
    ...Ass'n v. FLRA, 824 F.2d 61, 63-69 (D.C.Cir.1987); United States Dept. of Justice v. FLRA, 792 F.2d 25, 28 (2d Cir.1986); Tonetti v. FLRA, 776 F.2d 929, 931 (11th Cir.1985); AFGE, Local 1923 v. FLRA, 675 F.2d 612, 613 (4th To be sure, Congress did not explicitly deny to district courts the p......
  • National Ass'n of Government Employees v. FLRA, Civ. A. No. 2:93cv83.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • 29 Junio 1993
    ...approach to the matter was subsequently adopted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Tonetti v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 776 F.2d 929 (11th Cir.1985), a case presenting a question of first impression in the circuit concerning the Court's statutory jurisdiction to review the Au......
  • Powell v. Collins, No. 98-4053.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 7 Mayo 2003
    ...i.e., one whose report is available to both the defense and the prosecution. See Starr, 23 F.3d at 1289; Smith, 914 F.2d at 1159; Sloan, 776 F.2d at 929; Byers, 740 F.2d at 1114. As a result, in the matter before us, so long as Petitioner made the requisite preliminary showing that his sani......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, AFL-CI
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • 23 Septiembre 1987
    ...Department of Justice v. FLRA, 792 F.2d 25 (2d Cir.1986); U.S. Marshals Service v. FLRA, 708 F.2d 1417 (9th Cir.1983); Tonetti v. FLRA, 776 F.2d 929 (11th Cir.1985). Even if a violation of Circular A-76 amounted to an unfair labor practice, then, no judicial review would be available. Under......
  • Griffith v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, No. 86-5720
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • 25 Marzo 1988
    ...Ass'n v. FLRA, 824 F.2d 61, 63-69 (D.C.Cir.1987); United States Dept. of Justice v. FLRA, 792 F.2d 25, 28 (2d Cir.1986); Tonetti v. FLRA, 776 F.2d 929, 931 (11th Cir.1985); AFGE, Local 1923 v. FLRA, 675 F.2d 612, 613 (4th To be sure, Congress did not explicitly deny to district courts the p......
  • National Ass'n of Government Employees v. FLRA, Civ. A. No. 2:93cv83.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Virginia)
    • 29 Junio 1993
    ...approach to the matter was subsequently adopted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Tonetti v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 776 F.2d 929 (11th Cir.1985), a case presenting a question of first impression in the circuit concerning the Court's statutory jurisdiction to review the Au......
  • Powell v. Collins, No. 98-4053.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • 7 Mayo 2003
    ...i.e., one whose report is available to both the defense and the prosecution. See Starr, 23 F.3d at 1289; Smith, 914 F.2d at 1159; Sloan, 776 F.2d at 929; Byers, 740 F.2d at 1114. As a result, in the matter before us, so long as Petitioner made the requisite preliminary showing that his sani......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT