Award Number 7042
Docket No. MW-7032
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Dudley E. Whiting,
Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES
CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood, that:
(1) The Carrier violated the agreement when it failed to render
a decision within ten (10) days after completion of an investigation
of charges placed against Section Laborer C. J. Horner;
(2) The Carrier further violated the agreement when it entered
into an individual agreement with Section Laborer C. J. Homer setting forth the conditions under which Section Laborer C. J. Horner
would be restored to service, without seeking or securing the approval
and concurrence of the duly designated representative of all the employes covered by the effective collective bargaining agreement;
(3) The Carrier be required to compensate Section Laborer C. J.
Horner for all wages lost while out of service, with full seniority,
vacation and other rights unimpaired;
(4) Section Laborer C. J. Horner's record be cleared of any unfavorable entry made thereon arising out of the investigation held
on July 29, 1952, and out of the Carrier's individual agreement with
Section Laborer C. J. Horner as referred to in part (2) of this claim.
OPINION OF BOARD:
The claim that the Carrier violated the Agreement by failure to render a decision within ten days after completion of the
investigation cannot be sustained, because within such ten days the Carrier
and the employe entered into an agreement whereby in consideration of his
promise not to repeat his offense he was reinstated without pay for lost time.
An admission of guilt eliminates the necessity for a decision as to guilt or
innocence, so that agreement obviated the necessity for a decision under
Rule 53.
The claim that the Carrier violated the Agreement by entering into
that individual agreement without obtaining the approval of the designated
collective bargaining representative is invalid, because the rules do not
require such approval.
Some decisions are cited which hold that individual agreements inconsistent with the collective Agreement are invalid. This agreement is not
inconsistent with the collective Agreement but instead is consistent with
and contemplated by Rule 56.
[3557
7042-2
356
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving
the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
The Agreement was not violated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST: (Sgd.) A. Ivan Tummon
Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of June, 1955.