Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8924
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8774
2-C&NW-CM-'82
The Second Division consisted of the regular member: and in
addition Referee Paul C. Carter when award was rendered.
( Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
Parties to Dispute: ( and Canada




Dispute: claim of ETployes:







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, 193+.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction aver. the dispute involved herein.



The primary issue in this dispute is the Organization's contention that the Carrier violated Article V(a) of the August 21, 1954, National Agreement, which states:


~a~-m 1 Award No. 8924
F.ige 2 Docket No. 8771+
2 -caw-CM-' 82


sailed a claim with the Assistant Vice President and Division Manager, contending
Meat the Carrier violated the Agreement in its dismissal of Carman Sam Jones,
~wD.u, the record shows, was dismissed from Carrier's service on November 2'?, 1975,
Local Chairman did not receive a reply to his letter of June 7, 1979, within
~ixty days and contended that because of not being notified within sixty days,
the claim must be allowed as presented. The General Chairman wrote to Carrier's;
Director of Labor Relations on August 28, 1979, in which he again alleged:







Article V(a) of the August 21, 195+, National Agreement has been the subject f numerous awards of Divisions having jurisdiction over such disputes. Under :":e provisions of the rule, we consider it entirely proper for the Board to -arefully examine the rules relied upon by the Petitioner and the facts upon aich the claim is based. It is clear that the claim in our present dispute _.ns not "presented in writing by or on behalf of the employe involved to the ~vFficer of the Carrier authorized to receive same within 60 days from the date of :;urrence on which the claim or grievance is based", as required by the first :<.intenc,e of Article V(a). Third Division Award 16164 involved a dispute where riie claim was not filed within sixty days of the occurrence on which the claim es based, and the claim was never responded to by the Carrier in the handling .the dispute on the property. In Third Division Award 1616+, which Award '.-rzissed the claim, the following is quoted from Third Division Award No. :32:








Form 1 Page 3

Award No. 892+
Docket No. 877+
2-C&NW-CM-'82

the claim is of no consequence. Since the claim was invalid in the beginning, we have mo right to consider Carrier's later procedural error nor do we have a right to consider the merits of the case. We will dismiss the claim."

In Third Division Award 1616+ reference is also made to Third Division Award 968+, where it was concluded:

'... Since the claim was not properly filed In the first instance we do not reach the question of whether the second sentence of the above quoted provision (Article V(e) of the August 21, 1954, National Agreement) was complied with, nor do we reach the merits of the dispute."

We are in agreement with Third Division Award No. 1616+ and the other awards cited therein.

It is also well settled that the burden is on the Petitioner to present facts sufficiently specific to constitute a valit.i claim.

The claim in our present docket must be dismissed.

A W A R n

Claim dismissed.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


/. .. ice

By



Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of February, 1982.