The record before the Board establishes that Claimant Gregory is an IBEW monthly-rated employee assigned as an IBEW Communications Electronic Technician and, as such, compensated monthly for "all service performed." Here he claims overtime pay for performing emergency service after his regular hours in troubleshooting and repairing equipment on February 28, 2007.
On the afternoon of February 28, 2007, Claimant was asked to respond to a trouble call involving the base communications package at Jewell Ridge, West Virginia, a location within his regular assigned territory. He drove an hour and onehalf to the location, repaired the unit and drove home, arriving at 6:30 p.m. After then requesting and being denied two and one-half hours at overtime rates for his efforts, on March 9, 2007, he submitted this claim, asserting that he had performed service beyond his normal quitting time of 4:00 p.m.
The claim was initially declined on March 20, 2007 by System Manger Administration Barbour. Following Claimant's May 3, 2007 appeal, Carrier's Director Labor Relations A. J. Licate rejected it again on June 22, 2007. Claimant then corresponded with Carrier on July 23, 2007 indicating that it should make arrangements for a conference concerning the issue if it so chose, and advising that he intended to file the dispute with the Second Division of the National Railroad Adjustment Board. By letter dated August 13, 2007, Carrier's Assistant Director Labor Relations K. K. Ashley replied in part as follows:
On September 4, 2007, Carrier advised Claimant that .it could not forego the conference mandated by the statute but was flexible with respect to the date suggested. It further advised that if Claimant failed to conference the matter Carrier would consider the claim procedurally barred from further prosecution.
On September 10, 2007, Claimant offered to attend a conference if held in Bluefield, West Virginia. Failing that, he advised, he would "proceed with the exparte submission and take my chances with the NRAB. "
After Carrier rejected that suggestion on September 10, 2007, Claimant on September 12, 2007 submitted a Notice of Intent to file a Submission to the NRAB.
Carrier takes the position here that the matter is improperly before the Board. We agree and dismiss accordingly. In the absence of a conference on the property, the case is procedurally defective, precluding the Board from considering its merits. Failure to conference is no minor or "technical" defect. The Railway Labor Act mandates that absent clear compliance with the statute, claims not properly conferenced on the property such as this are barred from consideration by the NRAB on their merits. See, e.g., Second Division Award No. 7453 Norfolk and Western Railway Company & Claimant Vance Poteet (Eischen, Arb.) (1978).
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made. Form 1 Award No. 13978