Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 98113
SECOND DIVISION
Docket No. 955.2
2-CR-MA-184
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert M. O'Brien when award was rendered.
( International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Consolidated Rail Corporation
Dispute: Claim of F3nployes:
1. The Consolidated Rail Corporation violated Rule 2-A-4.
2. That machinists K. Deseve, R. Rider, J. Kummer and S. Foreman be compensated 3 hours pay each, at the prevailing machinists rate of pay
for the Carrier's violation o f rule 2-A-4 of the controlling Agreement.
3. That machinist R. Doming be compensated ZS hours pay (3 hours each
claim) at the prevailing machinists rate of pay for the Carrier's
violation of rule 2-A-4 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 employes within the meaning o f the Railway Labor Act
as approved June 21, 1934 .
This Division o f the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The Organization asserts that Carrier moved the Claimants from their regular
assignments for more than three (3) hours contrary to the provisions of Rule 2 A4. It therefore requests that they be compensated the additional pay set forth
in Rule 2-A-4.
This Division agrees with the Carrier that the instant claims filed by the
organization are vague and imprecise. For instance, ce are unable to discern
from the claims the precise dates on which Carrier allegedly violated Rule 2--A-4.
Nor do the claims explain where the Machinists in question were employed; or the
basis of the purported violation of Rule 2-A-4. The instant claims simply failed
to comply with the instructions outlined in Circular No. 1 of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board. Consequently, they must be dismissed because of their
procedural irregularity. No finding is made on the merits of the claims
presented, however, in the light of this ruling.
Form 1
Page 2
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
ATTEST:
Nancy J. r - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 7th day of March, 1984
Award No. 9818
Docket No. 9551
2-CR-MA-184
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division