NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS 

ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO,

Petitioner

v.

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

Respondent

______________________

2024-1748

______________________

Petition for review of an arbitrator’s decision in No. 

230711-NATC by Homer C. La Rue.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

Before LOURIE, CUNNINGHAM, and STARK, Circuit Judges.

LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

O R D E R

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association, AFLCIO (“NATCA”) filed this petition from the arbitrator’s decision upholding the dismissal of Tyler A. Mack. The Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) moves to dismiss the 

Case: 24-1748 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 08/22/2024
2 NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION v. FAA

petition. The union opposes dismissal and moves for leave 

to join Mr. Mack as a party. 

Mr. Mack was hired as an air traffic controller specialist trainee on June 24, 2021. According to the Notice of 

Proposed Removal, Mr. Mack was serving a one-year probationary period when the agency removed him on June 9, 

2022. Mr. Mack’s union, NATCA, filed a grievance challenging the removal, which led to the union taking the case 

to arbitration. On February 26, 2024, the arbitrator issued 

a decision denying the grievance. On April 24, 2024,

NATCA filed a petition at this court seeking review of the 

arbitrator’s final decision. 

In American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1367 v. Department of the Air Force, 61 F.4th 952 (Fed. 

Cir. 2023) (“AFGE”), we considered whether a union could

appeal an arbitrator’s decision. Based on longstanding 

precedent and statutory interpretation, we explained that 

“only the employee may appeal the unfavorable arbitration 

award,” and “unions lack standing to initiate an appeal.” 

Id. at 955 (citing 5 U.S.C. §§ 7121(f) and § 7703(a)(1)). We

also ruled that the employee could not later be substituted

to avoid dismissal. We explained: “a party may not substitute under Rule 43(b) [of the Federal Rules of Appellate 

Procedure] when the original party being substituted 

lacked standing to initiate the appeal.” Id. at 956.

AFGE compels dismissal here. NATCA cannot file a 

petition challenging the arbitrator’s decision.1 And while

1 NATCA urges the court to find that NATCA can assert the claims of its members because it meets the requirements for associational standing. But this court has 

repeatedly rejected this argument. See Reid v. Dep’t of 

Com., 793 F.2d 277, 279–82 (Fed. Cir. 1986); see also AFGE 

Local 3438 v. SSA, No. 2021-1972, 2022 WL 1653177, at *3 

(Fed. Cir. May 25, 2022). 

Case: 24-1748 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 08/22/2024
NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION v. FAA 3

NATCA here has moved to join Mr. Mack, as opposed to 

substitution, that distinction makes no difference because

NATCA was never a proper party to file a petition.2

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) FAA’s motion is granted. The petition for review is 

dismissed.

(2) NATCA’s motion is denied.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.

August 22, 2024

 Date

FOR THE COURT

 

2 We cannot construe the union’s response and request for joinder of Mr. Mack as a petition for review filed 

by Mr. Mack. See Fed. R. App. P. 15; Fed. R. App. P. 32(d) 

(“Every brief, motion, or other paper filed with the court 

must be signed by the party filing the paper or, if the party 

is represented, by one of the party’s attorneys.”).

Case: 24-1748 Document: 13 Page: 3 Filed: 08/22/2024