855 F.3d 335
D.C. Cir.2017Background
- Sarah Bryant, an Amtrak police officer, was investigated by Amtrak Internal Affairs (which followed Rule 50 procedures in two interviews) and later by Amtrak’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), which did not follow Rule 50 during its interview.
- The OIG report concluded Bryant lied about home ownership and falsified an affidavit; Amtrak subsequently fired Bryant.
- Bryant’s union, FOP Lodge 189, pursued grievance arbitration under the Amtrak–FOP collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
- The arbitrator found the OIG interrogation violated CBA Rule 50 (Police Officers’ Bill of Rights) and ordered reinstatement with back pay and restored seniority.
- Amtrak sought vacatur of the award under the Railway Labor Act; the district court vacated the award relying on the Inspector General Act and DHS v. FLRA.
- The D.C. Circuit majority affirmed vacatur, holding CBA procedures may not bind the Inspector General; Judge Pillard dissented, arguing the narrow RLA arbitration-review standard forecloses vacatur because the award itself did not compel illegal conduct by the OIG.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Amtrak) | Defendant's Argument (FOP/Bryant) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CBA Rule 50 can lawfully bind the Amtrak OIG | Rule 50 cannot constrain OIG investigatory authority under the Inspector General Act | Rule 50’s procedural protections apply to all bargaining-unit interrogations, including the OIG | Held: Rule 50 cannot be applied to bind the OIG; contractual limits on OIG investigations are contrary to law/public policy (affirmed vacatur) |
| Whether the arbitrator’s award must be vacated as contrary to law/public policy | Vacatur appropriate because enforcing Rule 50 against the OIG would impinge statutory OIG independence | Arbitrator’s award is case-specific evidence-exclusion/remedy and does not compel illegal action by OIG; RLA review is narrow | Held: Award vacated as it enforced an illegal contractual term vis-à-vis the OIG |
| Whether DHS v. FLRA controls application of CBA limits to Inspectors General | DHS establishes that collective bargaining may not add to/subtract from IG investigatory authority; controls here | Award pre-dated DHS; but even if it applied, the award itself does not compel IG compliance | Held: DHS controls; court relied on it to conclude Rule 50 may not govern the OIG |
| Whether review may consider arbitrator’s reasoning vs. award text | Amtrak: arbitrator’s reasoning shows she applied Rule 50 to OIG, evidencing enforcement of illegal term | FOP: review should be limited to the award’s text; the Award simply rescinded discharge for lack of admissible evidence | Held: Majority considered both the Award and arbitrator’s opinion and concluded the Award enforced an illegal contractual provision; dissent would limit review to the Award text |
Key Cases Cited
- United Paperworkers Int'l Union v. Misco, Inc., 484 U.S. 29 (1987) (arbitral awards may be vacated if contrary to law or well-defined public policy)
- U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. FLRA, 751 F.3d 665 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (collective bargaining may not alter Inspectors General’s investigatory authority)
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n v. FLRA, 25 F.3d 229 (4th Cir. 1994) (agreements governing IG procedures are not appropriately subject to bargaining)
- American Postal Workers Union v. U.S. Postal Serv., 789 F.2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (narrow public-policy exception to vacatur; courts should not lightly overturn arbitral awards)
- W.R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, 461 U.S. 757 (1983) (courts normally defer to arbitrators on questions of fact or law)
- Eastern Associated Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers, 531 U.S. 57 (2000) (award vacatur is constrained; public-policy exception must be explicit and dominant)