Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 13167
Docket No. 12992-I
97-2-94-2-54
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.
(Edward Gray
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Chesapeake and
( Ohio Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"I question the fact that I received a five day suspension, for the
derailment of a locomotive that my foreman instructed me to move. There
were between seven to ten derailments prior to my incident that the
individuals responsible received seven to ten days overhead."
FINDINGS:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute
are respectively carrier and employee 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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.
Following an Investigation, the Claimant received notification dated February 24,
1994 from the Carrier which read in pertinent part as follows:
"The investigation determined that you are responsible for the
derailment incident of January 3, 1994 in that you took it upon yourself to
Form 1 Award No. 13167
Page 2 Docket No. 12992-I
97-2-94-2-54
move a consist of locomotives and that while making this move you trailed
through a switch without properly aligning it. This was the cause of the
derailment of CSXT 1505 and the resulting damages. It was further
disclosed that you are a qualified engine mover and were trained in the
proper manner to move engines and align switches.
The discipline administered is five (5) days actual suspension . . . ."
On May 10, 1994, the Claimant wrote to the Board as follows:
"This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of the National
Railroad Adjustment Board, of my intention to file an ex parte submission
within thirty (30) days covering an unadjusted dispute between me and the
CSXT, involving the questions:
I question the fact that I received a five day suspension for the
derailment of a locomotive that my foreman instructed me to move.
There were between seven to ten derailments prior to my incident
that the individual responsible received seven to ten days
overhead."
The Claimant in fact did not file a Submission with the Board until March 28,
1995.
The Carrier points out, without contradiction, that the Claimant failed to follow
the requirement of Section 153, First (I), which states in pertinent part as follows:
"The disputes between an employee . . . and a carrier . . . shall be
handled in the usual manner up to and including the chief operating officer
of the carrier designated to handle such disputes."
The Claimant's action on his own volition is acceptable if undertaken according
to the applicable procedure. Nothing in the record, however, indicates that the Claimant
handled the dispute "in the usual manner" or requested a conference with the Carrier's
highest designated officer. On this basis alone, the claim is unequivocally improperly
before the Board for resolution. The Board notes the Carrier's allegation, although
without supporting documentation, that the Claimant's Organization was concurrently
processing a claim on behalf of the Claimant. If such is the fact, there is further cause
for not giving separate consideration to the claim.
Form 1 Award No. 13167
Page 3 Docket No. 12992-1
97-2-94-2-54
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of October 1997.