NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Award Number 22682
_ __ DIVISION Docket Number CL-22798
Martin F. Schein n, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and
( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers,
( Express and Station Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The River Terminal Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
(GL-8703) that:
1. The Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement
when it failed and refused to allow Clerk Philip Clayman sick leave
on January 26 and 27, 1978.
2. The Carrier shall now compensate Mr. Clayman for eight
(8) hours' pay at the pro rata rate of his assignment for each of
dates January 26 and 27, 1978.
OPINION OF BOARD: On January 30, 1978, claimant presented a
_Request For Sickness Allowance" form on which
he made claim for sickness allowance benefits for January 26 and 27,
1978. By letter dated March 10, 1978, Carrier requested that
claimant present "evidence of your sickness in the form of a
certificate from a reputable physician." Claimant furnished a
physician's statement-on March 28, 1978. By letter dated May 2, 1978,
Carrier indicated that it "cannot accept the letter froze Dr. Stewart
dated March 28, 1978 as satisfactory evidence."
Petitioner's primary argument in this case, both on the
property and before our Board, is that claimant is entitled to payment
as requested because of Carrier's failure to comply with the time
limits mandate.
RULE 32 - Violations - Grievances - Time Limits states:
"(A) All claims or grievances must be presented in
writing by or on behalf of the employee involved, to
the officer of the Carrier authorized to receive same,
within 60 days from the date of the occurrence on which
the claim or grievance is based. Should any such claim
Award Number 22682 Page 2
Docket Number CL-22798
"or grievance be disallowed, the carrier shall, within
60 days from the date same is filed, notify whoever
filed the claim or grievance (the employee or his
representative) in writing of the reasons for disallowance. If not so notified, the claim or grievance
shall be allowed as presented, but this shall not be
considered as a precedent or waiver of the contentions
of the Carrier as to other similar claims or grievances."
Carrier contends that it complied with Rule 32 by requesting
from claimant, on March 10, 1978, evidence of his sickness. This
request, it contends, "was in writing as required by Rule 32 and the
reason for disallowance was given, i.e., Carrier requested evidence
of claimant's sickness in form of a certificate from a reputable
physician covering the dates-claimed in accordance with Paragraph (K)
of Rule 53."
This position simply is not tenable.
The language of Rule 32 - Time Limits is clear, unambiguous
and mandatory upon all parties subject to it. Carrier's March 10,
1978 letter requesting evidence from a reputable physician was indeed
proper under the provisions of paragraph (K) of Rule 53 - Sick Leave;
however, it did not rise to the level of a disallowance of the claim
initiated on January 30, 7.978. This Board's decision in Third Division
Award No. 18352 has equal application here. There we said:
"*** Time limitations set by contractual agreement
have the same force and effect as those found in
statutes and court rules -- a party failing to comply
by nonfeasances finds himself hoisted by his own
petard."
See also Third Division Award Nos. 20657, 27.675, 21873, and
22162.
Time
limits, legally entered into, are binding in all phases
of personal and business life. Such limitations have a mutually
protective purpose and their stipulations must be honored or their
benefits forfeited.
In view of this
time limit
violation, we must sustain the
claim as presented without reaching the merits of this case.
Award Number 22682 page 3
Docket Number CL-22798
FINDIMS: The Third Division
of the
Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record arid 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, 7.934;
That this Division of
the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction
over
the dispute involved
herein;
and
The the Agreement was violated.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of
Third Division
ATTEST:
__
,xecutive Secretary
Dated at Chicago,
Illinois,
this 14th day of
December 1979.