NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MW-23260
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAItd: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier failed to
schedule and hold an investigation which was timely and properly requested
in conformance with Article 110 Rule 91(b) (1) (System File B-1870).
(2) As a consequence of the above, Trackman J. Be Harperp Jr#
shall be reinstated with Seniority and all other rights unimpaired., his
service record shall be restored and he shall be compensated for all wage
loss suffered."
OPINION CF BOARD: Claimant was formerly employed by the Carrier as a
trackmano having entered the service on April
4e 1977.
The Carrier contends that claimant was furloughed in force reduction on
November 19j,
1978,
and failed to comply with Rule
78.,
which reads:
"When employes laid off by reason of force
reduction desire to retain their seniority
rights., they must file their name and
address in writing with their immediate
supervisor within
7
calendar days of
date laid off. They must file their
name and address in writing with their
immediate supervisor for any subsequent
change in their mailing address. An
employe failing to return to service
within 10 calendar days after being
notified to do so (by mail or telegram
to last known address) will forfeit
all seniority rights. (This rule will
not protect seniority rights of employes affected by it beyond two years.)"
Award Number
23136
Page 2
Docket Number MW-23260
The Carrier contends that after the expiration of seven calendar
days of date laid off, claimant's personal record was closed in accordance
with Rule
78.
Rule
78
is self-executing and there is no proof in the record
that claimant did file his name and address within the time specified
in the rule.
When claimant was notified by the Carrier that he had not
filed his name and address., it was then up to the claimant to come forward
with information as to when he filed his name and address and who he filed it
with.
It is our considered opinion from the record before use that
claimant has not proved that he complied with the provisions of Rule
78
within the time specified therein.
As we have decided the dispute on its merits., it is not
necessary to pass upon the procedural issue raised.
FLINGS: 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 Agreement was not violated.
A W A R D r ___
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD AAJ1STMENT_BOARD'.
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
a'
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this
30th
day of January
1981.