NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
John J. McGovern, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES
THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood (GL-6197) that:
(a) The Carrier violated the Rules Agreement, effective May 1,
1942, particularly Rules 6-A-1 to 7-A-1, inclusive, when it imposed
discipline of dismissal upon H. E. Wills, Laborer, Sunnyside Yard,
Dining Car Department, Long Island City, New York, effective
January 7, 1965.
(b) H. E. Wills should be restored to service with seniority
and all rights unimpaired and his record cleared.
(c) H. E. Wills should be compensated in accordance with Rule
7-A-1(d) for all monetary loss sustained from January 7, 1965,
until adjusted. (Docket 1659)
OPINION OF BOARD:
The Carrier initially has entered a jurisdictional objection to the claim as filed, alleging that it has not been processed consonant with the provisions of Rule 7-B-I of the basic Agreement.
That rule reads:
"7-B-1. (Effective November 1, 1955) (a) Claims for compensation alleged to be due, may be made only by an employe, or by
the 'duly accredited representative' as that term is defined in this
Agreement, on his behalf, and must be presented, in writing, to
the employe's immediate Supervisor within ninety days from the date
the employe received his pay check for the pay period involved,
except:"
Carrier contends that the above rule is clear in its pronouncement that
all claims must be presented to the employe's immediate Supervisor. The
Carrier assumes the posture that there are no exceptions to this requirement, and that by submitting this claim to the Assistant Personnel Manager, instead of Claimant's "immediate Supervisor", the Claimant stands in
violation of the aforequoted 7-B-1.
The Organization, on the other hand, alleges that at the time the claim
was filed, the Claimant was not working for the Carrier, and, hence, had no
immediate Supervisor, as contemplated by Rule 7-B-1.
We cannot abide the interpretation placed on the applicable Rule by the
employes, because to do so would, in our judgment, be an unreasonable distortion of the clear meaning and intent of the Rule. We agree with Carrier's contention that the only reasonable application of the Rule is that
the term "immediate Supervisor" is that individual for whom the dismissed
employe last performed compensated service.
We are constrained to state that we dislike to dismiss claims because of
procedural defects in being presented to this Board. The grievance procedures and the entire area of free collective bargaining can best be served
by a full adjudication of claims decided on their substantive merits. However, procedural defects cannot be countenanced, and both parties to the Collective Bargaining Agreement would be well advised to ensure that they
avoid them at all costs. We will dismiss this claim because it is not properly before this Board. We do not have jurisdiction in the matter as presented.
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
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
That the claim is barred.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 1st day of March 1968.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
16117 2