NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSUENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MS-24321
Tedford E. Schoonover., Referee
Joe Fresher
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Norfolk'aad Western Railway Comfy
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of
the National Railroad Adjustment Board., of my intention
to file an ex parts submission on October 30, 1981 covering an unadjusted
dispute between me and the Norfolk and Western Railway Company involving
the question:
Am I entitled to reimbursement and compensation because Z was
cut off my fob with headquarters is Chillicothe,, Ohio and put in a worse
position by having to drive to Portsmouth. Ohio each day? During this
time and at present I am top man on the roster with seniority and younger
men was kept on the fob on the Scioto Division."
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant was employed as an electric welder in Carrier's
Maintenance of Way Department at Chillicothe., Ohio. On
April
lo,
1981, claimant's position was abolished. He subsequently exercised
his seniority to obtain an electric welder position at Portsmouth, Ohio. His
claim is fns 50 travel miles each way from Chillicothe to Portsmouth and
return plus two (2) hours additional pay each work day plus reimbursement for
one (1) meal each day.
This claim is fatally flawed for several reasons, namely:
There was no timely claim initiated and progressed as
required by the negotiated Rules Agreement;
There was no on-property conference held to discuss the
complaint as required by the Railway Labor Act;
r-·
The dispute involves as alleged violation of a merger
agreement which agreement contains its own disputes resolution provisions.
Section 2, First and Second of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, state is
relevant portion as follows:
"It shall be the duty of all carriers, their officers, agents,
and employes to exert every reasonable effort ... to settle 311
disputes ...." (L5 U.S.C. § 152, First).
"All disputes between a carrier or carriers and its or their
employes shall be considered, and, if possible, decided, with all
expedition, is conference between representatives designated and
Award
Number 24083
Page
2
Docket Number NS-24321
"authorized so to confer, respectively, by the carrier or carriers and by the employes thereof i
...: (45 U.S.C.
9
152, Second).
Section 3, First (i) of the Act mandates that all nisputes between an employe
and a carrier -
"... be handled in the usual manner up to and including
the chief operating officers of the carrier designated to
handle such disputes ...." (45 U.S.C. ® 153r First (i).
Section 301.2(b) o: the Rules of Organization and Procedure issued by the
National Railroad Adjustment Board as Circular No. 1 dated October 10, 1934
states -
"(b) No petition shall be considered by shy division of
the Board unless the subject matter has been handled in accordance
with the provision -of the Railway Labor Act, approved June 21,
1934."
The record in this case clearly shows that none of the aforestated conditions
were met by claimant. The Board has no recourse but to dismiss this claim.
FINDINGS: The Third. Division of the Adjustment Beard, 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.
FvCtl,~
`,
A W A R D ~~A.'1 i;
Claim dismissed. " Ch;
?1TATIONAL RAILR 8~7~f7T 20AM
By Order of Thi-~
on
ATTyST: Acting rtecutiw Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
Rosemarie nrasch - W=-Inistrative Assistaat
Jatad et Chicago,
i1'
inois, this 5th day of January
1963·