Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 133815
Docket No. 13267
99-2-97-2-37
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Elizabeth C. Wesman when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood Railway Carmen, Division of
( Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Springfield Terminal Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the Committee of the Union that:
1. That the Springfield Terminal Railway Company violated the terms
of our current agreement, in particular Rule 29.2 when they
arbitrarily ordered Carman Harold Huard to perform overtime
service rerailing two (2) freight cars at Jay, ME.
2. That, accordingly, the carrier be ordered to cease and desist from
blatantly disregarding the clear rules set forth in the collective
agreement. Furthermore, as the carrier insists on continually
violating this agreement, we request one (1) days pay for the
claimant at the applicable rate."
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.
Form 1 Award No. 133811
Page 2 Docket No. 13267
99-2-97-2-37
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Carrier has raised a procedural objection in this case, which must be
addressed before the Board may proceed to the merits of the claim in question.
Specifically, the Carrier maintains that: 1) the claim presented to the Board its
substantively changed from the original claim progressed on the property; and 2) the
claim seeks injunctive and prospective relief- a matter which is beyond the jurisdiction
of the Board. The Carrier contends that throughout the handling on the property the
parties continued to address the grievance in terms
of
the hypothetical,
of
what might
happen in the future, and the Organization may not now change the wording
of
the claim
in the hopes
of
presenting a more viable grievance to the Board.
The Board has reviewed the record and considered the Carrier's procedural
objection. The claim as presented to the Board is significantly different from the claiun
progressed on the property. Furthermore, the Carrier is correct that the Board has no
jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief prospectively for events which have not yet
occurred. In light of the foregoing, the Board has no alternative but to dismiss the claim
in its entirety.
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 12th day
of
April 1999.