Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 13701
Docket No. 13576
03-2-00-2-58
The Second Division consisted
of
the regular members and in addition Referee Edwin
H. Benn when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood
of
Railway Carmen Division
( Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Springfield Terminal Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
"Claim
of
the Committee
of
the Union that:
1. The Springfield Terminal Railway Company violated the terms
of
our
current agreement, in particular Rule 26 when they refused to allow
Mark E. Lawrence his right to displace a junior Carman as an exercise
of
seniority.
2. That accordingly, the Springfield Terminal Railway Company be
ordered to compensate Mark E. Lawrence in the amount
of
eight (8)
hours at the straight time rate for each workday he was denied his
displacement rights. Additionally, the carrier be ordered to
compensate Mark E. Lawrence for any overtime payments, vacation,
insurance, holidays, personal leave days, sick leave days and any
Railroad retirement benefits he may have lost as a result of the
carrier's actions."
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. 13701
Page 2 Docket No. 13576
03-2-00-2-58
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Claimant is designated on the 1999 roster as a "Painter" with a seniority date of
January 17, 1994. On June 24, 1999 after his job was abolished in the Paint Shop, the
Claimant attempted to displace S. R. Patrie, a Carman (according to the Organization) who
hired out on March 4,1999. The Claimant's attempted displacement of the junior employee
Patrie was not allowed by the Carrier on the ground that the Claimant was not qualified as
a Carman. This claim followed.
This is the same kind of dispute decided by the Board in Second Division
Awards13699 and 13700. The clear language of Rule 26.1 entitles employees displacement
rights based on seniority and the clear language of Rule 12.5(a) entitles those employees "up
to 20 working days in which to demonstrate their ability to competently perform the job."
The Claimant was not given the opportunity to demonstrate his abilities as required by Rule
12.5(a). The Carrier therefore violated the clear language of the Agreement.
For a remedy, and as in Awards 13699 and 13700, the Claimant shall be allowed to
displace into the Carman's position. If the Claimant can then demonstrate that he has the
"ability to competently perform the job" as set forth in Rule the 12.5, Claimant shall then
be entitled to be made whole.
AWARD
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an
award favorable to the Claimants) be made. The Carrier is ordered to make the Award
effective on or before 30 days following the postmark date the Award is transmitted to the
parties.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of January, 2003.