Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 35865
Docket No. MS-33284
01-3-96-3-781
The Third Division consisted
of
the regularmembers and in addition Referee Robert
Perkovich when award was rendered.
(Richey Barksdale
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, Inc.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"I am currently involved in a dispute with the above name carrier regarding
the awarding
of
a higher position (inspector) to a junior employee, M. Berko.
This action is a flagrant violation
of
the agreement between the Brotherhood
of
Railroad Signalmen and New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, that existed
during the time
of
the awarded position.
I charged the Carrier with violating rule #2-A-1 (d), rule #3-B-2 (a) and rule
#15
of
the aforementioned agreement.
As the senior bidder for the position
of
inspector, "Group I", the award
should have been to me. The carrier has tactfully tried to change the subject
from rule violations to qualifications.
I am seeking as the remedy the same date for the inspector position as M.
Berko, September 28, 1991 and the recovery
of
all monetary losses that have
resulted because
of
this dispute."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division
of
the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are
respectively carrier and employee within the meaning
of
the Railway Labor Act, as
approved June 21, 1934.
Form 1 Award No. 35865
Page
2 Docket No. MS-33284
01-3-96-3-781
This Division
of
the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved
herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice
of
hearing thereon.
On September 14, 1994, the Carrier bulletined the position
of
Inspector, Symbol No.
C-235. Thereafter applications were received from 16 individuals, including the Claimant
and M. Berko. The Carrier thereupon determined that there were no qualified bidders and
on September 28, 1994 bulletined the position again. Subsequently, the applicants were
scheduled for testing and interviews. Only ten of the applicants, including the Claimant,
participated in the testing and interviewing process. The Claimant did not attain a passing
score and the position was subsequently awarded to M. Berko, the most senior applicant
with the highest score among the applicants.
There is no question, nor is the claim made herein, that the Carrier has the right to
make a determination whether bidders for a position have established their qualifications
for a bulletined position. In addition, a review of the governing contractual provisions
involved in this dispute clearly shows that once the Carrier has determined that there are
no qualified bidders to whom a position must be awarded, it may test and interview to
determine which of the remaining bidders is entitled to the position in question. In the
instant matter the Carrier did just that and the Claimant removed himself from
consideration when he did not attain a passing score.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of December, 2001.