w w

Claimant was employed by the Carrier as a Welder, and failed to pass the required examination on the Carriers Rules. According to the record, Claimant was permitted to take the test on three seperate occassions, and when he failed the third time, was disqualified from holding positions as either a Welder or a Welder Foreman.

Claimant was verbally advised of his disqualification, by Welding supervisor Bostick, on July 16, 1985, to be effective July 19, 1985. Claimant reported to a Welder Helper position on July 22, 1985, and has occupied that position since that time.

A written Notice of disqualification, dated July 25, 1985, was sent to the Claimant via Certified Mail, with a copy to the Organization. Although the Organization confirms that it received a copy, it asserts that Claimant did not receive the letter, because it was sent to the incorrect address. Therefore, the union argues, Claimant was not given proper Notice of the disqualification, and was denied his right to request an Investigation. It urges, here, that such failure invalidates the procedure, and

The Carrier argues that the address to which the letter was mailed, was the last known address on file at either the Division or General Offices. Further, Carrier argues that notwithstanding the absence of the letter, Claimant knew of his disqualification, and demonstrated that knowledge by reporting to and occupying the welder Helper position. Carrier points out that no assertion has been made that Claimant is qualified, or that the tests were in error. The sole issue in contention is the Certified letter.

The organization points out that Claimant was receiving his paychecks at an address in Fort Worth, Texas, so the carrier knew of his new address. The Carrier asserts that many of its employees receive paychecks at addresses other than their homes, and that the proper address for correspondence such as this is the address filed by the employee at the Division and General Offices. There is no contention that the Claimant filed any address at these offices, other than that to which the letter was sent.

Numerous awards have held that a Carrier may rely upon a certified letter, sent to the employees last address on file. The fact that Claimant's paychecks were being sent to a new address indicates that he had given that address to someone, but it does not show that he had changed his address with the Division and General Office.

aware of his disqualification, notice. He was not denied the due to the missing letter. In right to Investigation at all.

and admits to being given verbal right to request an Investigation, fact, the letter did not mention a in this case, it would have made

Dated: