    

  

      

     



    





     

   

  

           

           

         

          

             

          

   

 

              

             

       

              

            

          

           

             

  

              

           

           

       

PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 7599 AWARDNO. 146

Page 2

FINDINGS OF THE BOARD:

The Board, upon the whole record and on the evidence, finds that the parties herein are the Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; that this Board is duly constituted by agreement of the parties; that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute, and that the parties were given due notice of the hearing.

The Organization contends that it and the Claimants are entitled to a default decision in their favor per Rule 24 of the Agreement.

Rule 24 dictates the process for handling claims on the property. The rule specifies the steps that must be followed and the timing of those steps. If the time limit for each step is not followed, the rule provides that the claim must be allowed.

The claim was filed on September 13, 2022. The Carrier denied it on November 10, 2022.

On January 2, 2023 the Organization's appeal asked the Carrier to advise when the conference would be held. Rule 24(b) provides that the meeting is to be held within 60 days of the Carrier's receipt of the appeal. It was not conducted until June 12, 2023.

On September 11, 2023, the Organization wrote to the Carrier that it had not received the required post-conference letter per Rule 24(b) within the 60-day time limit specified by the rule. On November 8, 2023, the Organization notified the Carrier that it was in default. The letter went on to offer the Carrier an extension in which to reply. According to the record, neither of the default assertions in these letters was refuted by the Carrier.

The record does not show that the Carrier complied with the time limit of Rule 24.

Therefore, the Claim must be allowed without reaching the merits.

AWARD: The Claim is sustained. The Carrier is directed to comply with this Award withing thirty (30) days of the date shown below.

GeraldR w

Wallin, Chairman and Neutral Member

.l)1,,4' N"

..s;k- )J_;{)J 1

/ JohnSchlismann Organization Member

Steve Napierkowski Carrier Member