The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John J. McGovern when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 99, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, AFL - CIO
(Federated Trades)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: That the employes listed on Exhibit A, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, were employed by the Illinois Central Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, at its Paducah Shops, Paducah, Kentucky.
That on April 19, 1966, carrier posted notice to all shop employes that the Paducah Shops, Paducah, Kentucky, would observe daylight savings time beginning April 25, 1966. That on April 20, 1966, the shop union representatives requested a conference with carrier officers to discuss the matter of putting the Paducah Shops on daylight savings time. This conference was held on April 21, 1967, and the shop union representatives' letter confirming same is attached. It will be noted that this letter, dated May 3, 1966, confirmed that carrier declined the local federation's request to submit the question of daylight savings time observance to a vote of the employes of the Paducah Shops.
That on June 2, 1966, carrier's officer, Shop Superintendent C. T. Eaker, requested that another poll be taken of the employes at the Paducah Shops to determine any change in their attitude on the Paducah Shops going on daylight savings time. This poll was taken with the results that the Paducah Shops Federation requested that the Paducah Shops go on daylight savings
If the federation desires to change the agreement to provide that all starting times be on standard time, the remedy is through negotiation, and not by filing claims.
FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The claim in this case was filed with the Shop Superintendent by letter dated June 20, 1966, and declined by him on August 16, 1966. Sixty-five days later, the Company's next office in the Appeals procedure, received the Federation's apppeal of the Superintendent's declination. The letter was dated 59 days after the claim was rejected and the envelope containing the letter, was postmarked on the 63rd day. The Company officer wrote the Union on November 22, 1966, that the claim was closed because the Union failed to appeal within 60 days.
Rule 37(b) of the Agreement, which is identical to Article V, Section 1(b), of the August 21, 1954 Agreement provides in part:
We hold that the appeal was not filed within the sixty day period as specified above, and are accordingly left with no alternative other than to dismiss the claim.