NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
PARTIES TO DISPUTE;
ALBERT W. SMALL
THE INDIANAPOLIS
UNION
RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
(a) The Petitioner would represent that on or about August
20, 1909,
he was wrongfully discharged from his position as crossing
watchman with The Indianapolis Union Railway Company.
(b) At the time of the wrongful discharge, there was in full
force and effect a Union Contract between the Indianapolis Union
Railway Company and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way
Employes; the Petitioner being a member in good standing of said
Union at the time of the wrongful discharge.
OPINION OF BOARD; This dispute presents a claim by dismissed
Crossing Watchman Albert W. Small, Sr., for reinstatement with seniority
and back wages lost.
Rule 30 (c)-Claims and Grievances-of the applicable Agreement
governing the dispute provides in part as follows:
'(c) The requirements outlined in paragraphs (2) and (b),
pertaining to appeal by the employe and decision by the carrier,
shall govern in appeals taken to each succeeding officer, except
in cases of appeal from the decision of the highest officer designated by the carrier to handle such disputes. All claims or grievances involved in a decision by the highest designated officer shall
be barred unless within 9 months from the date of said officer's
decision proceedings are instituted by the employe or his duly
authorized representative before the appropriate division of the
National Railroad Adjustment Board or a system, group or regional
board of adjustment that has been agreed to by the parties hereto
as provided in Section 3, Second of Railway Labor Act. It is understood, however, that the parties may by agreement in any particular
case extend the
9
months' period herein referred to." (Emphasis
ours)
The record shows that the Carrier's highest designated officer of appeal
rendered his final decision in writing on October
1, 19f,9.
Proceedings were instituted before the Third Division, National Railroad Adjustment Board, by Petitioner's notice of August 13, 1970. This
is, of course, much mare than the nine (9) months after the date of the
Carrier's decision.
Petitioner argues that further handling of the matter with both Carrier
and Union has the effect of extending the time limit to the extent of such
handling.
This Board has universally rejected identical contentions. Award 10688
(quoting First Division Award 18054), 11777, 12417, 14139, for example.
The rule itself provides the method of extending the time limits. We have
no power to vary the terms of a contract negotiated in conformity with the
Railway Labor Act, as amended.
Therefore, since the claim in the present case was not appealed to the
Third Division, National Railroad Adjustment Board, within nine (9) months
from the date of the decision of Carrier's designated officer, it is barred
and must, therefore, be dismissed.
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 Employe involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employe 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 to the extent indicated in the Opinion; 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 25th day of November 1970.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
18309 2