This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The Claimant was disqualified from his position as a Foreman. An Unjust Treatment Hearing was held without a change in the outcome.
The record shows that the Claimant was disqualified after the Carrier determined that the Gang Supervisor had to override decisions made by the Claimant; the Claimant's planning resulted in an Amtrak train delay; the Claimant allowed trains (including a commuter) to run over new trackage at full speed instead of instructing them to move in accord with a slow order; the Claimant appeared disoriented during job briefings and deferred questions from his crew to other individuals; the Claimant had the necessary help available to him; and other Foremen on the same gang did not have problems meeting their job requirements.
Qualification, fitness and ability to perform a job are determinations to be made by the Carrier, subject only to limited review by the Board as to whether the Carrier was arbitrary in its determination. Based on the developed record, we cannot find that the Carrier was arbitrary in its determination to disqualify the Claimant. Given the problems exhibited by the Claimant in the performance of his job, a rational basis existed for the Carrier's determination to disqualify the Claimant.
The Organization's arguments that the Claimant was improperly disqualified go to whether the decision made by the Carrier was a correct one. At best, the Organization's arguments make the Carrier's decision a debatable one. But, showing that a determination was debatable, even wrong, does not equate with a demonstration that the decision was arbitrary. A rational basis exists for the Carrier's determination. That determination was therefore not arbitrary. In light of the limited review standard, that is as far as this inquiry can go.
The Organization's procedural arguments have been considered and do not change the result. In light of the result, the Carrier's procedural argument is moot.