NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MS-21170
James C. McBrearty, Referee
(Francis A. Boyson
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Boston and Maine Corporation
STAT&r4M OF CLAM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules
of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, of my
intention to file an ex parte submission on March 20,
1975
covering an
unadjusted dispute between me and the Boston and Maine Corp. involving
the question:
The Boston and Maine Corp violated the Agreement of August 20,
1973
when it refused to post for bidding the position of
trainee to the position of Train Dispatcher and its stead
picked selected B.R.A.C. employees to train at their B.R.A.C.
position rate of pay and all the while training, maintained
their standing as B.R.A.C. employees 100 per cent.
Also the Boston and Maine Corp violated the finding of the
Third Division in stating that Award
#19953
dial not have
any standing on the Boston and Maine Corp.
I am asking for monetary award plus my request of February
18,
1974
be implemented.
OPINION OF BOARD: The first issue which must be dealt with in the
instant case is Carrier's allegation that the claim
must be dismissed because no conference was held on the property.
A review of the record indicates that no conference was ever
held on the property regarding the instant claim. Claimant rejected two
(2) offers of a conference with Carrier, and then attempted to convince
Carrier that he was agreeable to a conference during his active working
hours as a Towerman at Winchester Tower, Massachusetts, or at certain
times by telephone only.
The Board finds that the failure to have a conference on the
property is fatal to Petitioner's claim.
Section ~ Second, of the Railway Labor Act req-wires that`'all__-
disputes . . . shall be considered . . . in-conference." Moreover,
Section
3,
First (i) of the Act indicates that disputes ".shall be handled
in the usual manner" prior to a petition being referred to the appropriate
division of the Adjustment Board.
Award Number 21440
Docket Number MS-21170
Page 2
Furthermore, numerous decisions of this Hoard have held that
failure to hold a conference on the property is a serious procedural flaw
on which basis the claim must be dismissed (Awards 20976, 20752, 20737,
20574, 20106, 19885, 19709, 19620, 17166, and 10852).
Claimant's offer to meet with Carrier in conference while he was
working in the tower, or at specified times on the telephone, is not.
sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the Act.
As stated in Award 20106:
" . . . if individual employees were permitted unilaterally
to determine the place for conference in each claim submitted rather than to conform to the usual ma
orderly procedure mutually agreed upon between the
Organization and the Carrier for all claims, the result
would be chaos and confusion."
In conclusion, we cannot consider the merits of this dispute,
and have no alternative but to dismiss the Claim based on the serious
procedural flaw of failing to have a conference on the property.
FTNDLNCS: 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.
A
w
A R D
Claim dismissed.
ATTEST:
s~,~/A~-,
lgwto_~
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTt= BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of February 1977.