Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7216
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7054
2 MP MA-'77
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Gene T. Ritter when award was rendered.
( International Association of Machinists and
( Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated the controlling
Agreement, in particular Rule 32, arbitrarily .and improperly
disciplining Machinist K. G. Beasley commencing June 5, 1974.
2. That, accordingly, Machinist K. G. Beasley be compensated from
7:30 A.M., June 5, 1974, for 1744-hours at the applicable pro rata
rate of pay, 16 hours at the punitive rate of pay for overtime
for which he would have been available, plus 12% per annum interest
until claim is settled, and the proper Railroad Retirement
contribution by the Carrier, in conformity with Rule 32 (d) of
the controlling Agreement.
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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon,.
This claim is barred under the provisions of Rule 31 (a) which requires
that all claims must be presented
in
writing on behalf of the involved
employee to the officer of the Carrier authorized to receive the same within
sixty (60) days from the date of the occurrence on which the claim or
grievance is based. The record in this dispute discloses that the claim was
not filed with the officer authorized to receive the same within sixty days,
and therefore, this Board has no jurisdiction to consider this case on its
merits. (See Second Division Awards Nos. 7088, 7026, 6992, 6981, 6980 and
many others.) The organization relies on the fact that the claim was not
filed with the Superintendent because the Superintendent rendered the
decision imposing the discipline in this case. In order to confer jurisdiction
upon this Board for the purpose of appeal, it was necessary that the mandatory
procedural requirements be met.
Form 1 Award
NO-7216
Page 2 Docket No. 7054
2 SIP MA-' 77
A W A R D
Claim Dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
,Aosemarie Brasch = Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this
25th
day of January, 1977.