NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Locket Number MS-25623
John E. CZoney, Referee
(Donald H. Jeffries
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
·My question remains, will I be allowed the rate of the position
I now occupy"for a period not exceeding five years following the
effective date"of my being placed in a worse position with respect
to rate of pay, as a result of the computerization and otherwise
transferring of
my position of Chief Clerk, E-2, rate of pay
$2,562.79 per month, including COLA (rate on this date) to
Baltimore, Maryland?·
OPINION OF BOARD: The record shows that this claim was first presented to the
Carrier in a letter from Chief Clerk D. H. Jeffries on March
1, 1982. Manager Car Accounting E. D. Hicks denied the claim by letter dated
March 22, 1982.
On
May 3, 1982, Chairman B. E. Gibson filed a claim on behalf of
Jeffries.
On
May 21, 1982, Hicks notified Gibson that Jeffries had filed an
earlier claim on his own behalf alleging violations of certain Agreements different
from those cited by the Organization and stated wyou have not appealed the
claim as previously presented, but rather you have filed a totally new claim
relating to the same contentions'. Hicks then declined the claim.
The Carrier contends there was no further handling of the Jeffries
claim on the property nor any correspondence with him regarding it until notification
from the Board on November 23, 1983, that the claim had been appealed.
Rule 27 1/2 (b) of the applicable Agreement provides in part:
'If a disallowed claim or grievance is to be appealed,
such appeal must be in writing and must be taken within
60 days from receipt of notice of disallowance, and the
representative of the Carrier shall be notified in writing
within that time of the rejection of his decision-the
parties may, by agreement, at any stage of the handling
of a claim or grievance on the property, extend the 60
day period for either a decision or appeal...·
Section (c) of Rule 2? 1/2 imposes the same time limits upon appeals to each
succeeding officer ex;_°pt that:
Award Number 25429 Page 2
Locket Number MS-25623
"All claims or grievances involved in a decision by the
highest designated officer shall be barred unless within
9 months from the date of said officer's decision proceedings are instituted by employee or his duly
representative before... the National Railroad Adjustment
Board...".
The Carrier maintains the claim was never appealed or progressed to
the Carriers' highest designated officer and that there was never a conference
on the property. Claimant points to six extensions of the time limit for appealing
"the decision of Mr. E. D. Nicks... in his letter dated May 21, 1982...".
A long line of Third Division Awards have made clear that rules of ar.
Agreement regarding the progression of claims and grievances must be compl.·'ed
with. There is no evidence of such compliance here. Whatever the effect or
the Agreements to extend the time for appeal of the May 21, 1982, denial of
claim, it is not that claim which is before this Board. It is the claim made
on March 1, 1982, and denied on March 22, 1982, which we have at issue. There
is no evidence of an Agreement to extend the appeal time in that claim. This
Board notes the Carrier clearly took the position that the May 3, 1982, letter
was a new and separate claim. This was never contested by either the Organization
or by Jeffries. while Jeffries denies having knowledge of the Carrier's letter
stating that position until July 26, 1983, it is clear that the May 3, 1982,
letter, a copy of which he received, requests the Carrier to "accept this claim *.
It does not refer to any prior claim or to any denial of a prior claim. It
does not on its face purport to be an appeal of a prior denial. In short, we
see nothing to indicate Claimant had been misled by circumstances to believe
the denial of his claim was being appealed. We further note apparently no
conference on the property has been held. In these circumstances the claim is
not properly before this Board.
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;
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.
Award Number 25429 Page 3
Docket Number MS-25623
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
8y Order of Third Division
Attest:
Nancy er - Executive -secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of April 1985.