This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
It is the Org~nizatioa's positim that the Carrier violated Rule 26.1 on April 2, 2007, or shortly thereafter, when it would not allow the Claimant to displace a junior employee on Carman Position Nos. 49 or 54 at Waterville, Maine, because he did not possess a CDL Class A license. It argued that the Claimant was scheduled to receive his road test and truck permit test on April 11, 2007; thus, he could have become rally qualified within days of having exercised his displacement which the Carrier should have allowed. Because it did not allow the displacement it forced the Claimant to displace another employee at Rigby Yard, S. Portland, Maine, which is 80 miles away from his home point of Waterville, Maine. It requested that until the violation is corrected the claim be sustained as presented.
It is the position of the Carrier that it did not violate Rule 26.1 It argued that all New England states and various other states as far away as Florida and Arkansas within which it transports company materials, , machinery and equipment require its drivers to have a CDIJA License. Because the Claimant did not have that license it could not allow him to displace a junior employee who had a license. The Carrier asserts that without this license, the Claimant was unable to perform all duties of Position Nos. 49 or 54 in Waterville and was not qualified in accordance with Rule 12.5(x). It stated that the Claimant was aware of the licensing requirement and should have made an effort to acquire the required license before he was faced with being furloughed or disqualified for lack of qualification. It concluded by stating that when the Claimant holds the requisite CDL/A license, he will be able to exercise his seniority rights on any position with that requirement that becomes available, but in the meantime the claim should be denied
The Board thoroughly reviewed the record and finds that on the date the Claimant attempted to exercise his displacement of junior Carmen at Waterville, Maine, he did not possess the required CDIJA license. Rule 12.5(x) which is relevant to this dispute, states the following: Form 1 Award No. 13992
In a very similar case (Second Division Award 13969 involving these same parties) a senior otherwise qualified employee was not allowed to displace a junior employee because he did not have a required hoisting license. The Board held:
The same logic and rationale expressed in Award 13969 is directly on point in the instant case. It is clear that the Claimant was required to possess a CDL/A license as a condition precedent to being entitled to the opportunity to demonstrate his ability to competently perform the job. Because he did not have the required license he could not meet the first hurdle for displacement. If he had garnered the required license before attempting to exercise his seniority he could have displaced and, thereafter, would have been entitled to demonstrate his competency to perform the position. Absent the required CDL/A license, the Board finds and holds that the claim must be denied.