NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVIS13N Docket Number MW-22325
Joseph A. Sickles, Referee
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
that:
(1) The Carrier's disqualification of John Brown, Jr. as
an Assistant Foreman was not in conformance with nor supportable by
Agreement rules pertaining thereto System File 12-8(77-2) J3/P:R
Brown, John Jr_/.
(2) Claimant John Brown, Jr shall be returned to his
position as Assistant Foreman, his seniority as Assistant Foreman
shall be established as of June 1, 1976, ne shall be compensated for
any wage loss resulting from the aforesaid disqualification."
OPINIJN OF BOARD: Claimant was awarded an Assistant Foreman position,
effective June 1, 1976; but on July 23, 1976,
the Roadmaster disqualified him because:
"You have not demonstrated your ability to meet the
requirements of Assistant Foreman on Surfacing Gang 8565
to either the foreman on the gang or to myself and,
therefore, you have failed to qualify for the position
within the 60 calendar days required in the agreement.
It is evident that you do not have sufficient basic
knowledge of the operation of the track liner or
power tamping jack in order to turn out the quality
or quantity of work required by the Railroac. in
addition, it is my observation that your ability to
organize forces is not up to standard and that you
need to improve in the area of leadership.
Therefore, it is my recommendation that at first
opportunity you bid on a track machine operator';;
position on a gang where the power tamping jack and
the track liner are involved in order to familiarize
Award Number 22411 Page 2
Docket Number MW-22325
"yourself with the fundamentals of track surfacing
and lining with these machines. In addition, I
would recommend you take a course involving leadership qualities in order to improve yourself in thi
area."
The disqualification was confirmed on appeal.
Rule 12, Section 4 states;
"Employees accepting promotion. will be given a
fair chance to demonstrate their ability to meet
the requirements of the pos-_tion; if failing to
so qualify within sixty (60) calendar days the
position will be declared vacant, and the employee
may return to his former rank in accordance with
Rule 13, Section 3."
Claimant asserts that he did not receive necessary manuais
and instruction and that he was hindered, rather than aided, as well
as being prejudged.
Carrier reminds is that Rule 12, Section 2 specifies that
"Management" shall judge ability, and it insists that its action was
in compliance with the above cited Section 4 of the Rule. It states
that the Claimant was given the opportunity to demonstrate his ability
- but he failed to do so.
Certainly, Carrier's action was timely and, in our view,
the entirety of the testimony presented at the hearing convinces us
that Carrier's action was not arbitrary or capricious.
Limiting our consideration to :matters properly presented
while the dispute was under consideration on the property, we are
of the view that there was sufficient evidence presented to substantiate the disqualification and, a
action to stand.
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;
Award Number 22411 Page 3
Docket Number MW-22325
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 Agreement was not violated.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST;
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of May 1979.