BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 924
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES
and
CHICAGO & NORTH WESTERN TRANSPORTATION CO.
Case No. 232
Award No. 2~
L)
I
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the Brotherhood that:
1. The disqualification as a B&B foreman of D. G. Nichols for
allegedly neglecting his duties a B&B foreman was without
just and sufficient cause, capricious and inappropriate (System File
2PG-3514T; Carrier's File 81-93-54).
2. Claimant D. G. Nichols shall now be allowed the remedy prescribed
in Rule 19(d).
FINDINGS:
On October 5, 1992, the Claimant had been displaced to a B&B foreman position
in the Des Moines, Iowa area.
On October 27, 1992, the Claimant was working on his assignment on Bridge 51.9
in the Rake Subdivision where he was to construct a new bridge. He was observed by his
roadmaster at which time the roadmaster determined that the Claimant did not know what
he was doing. Subsequently, the Claimant was charged with neglecting his duties as a
B&B foreman while handling his crew and his responsibilities as a foreman.
At the hearing, the roadmaster's testimony described at length his observations of
SBA 9.14- - A4! D ,zoy
the Claimant on October 27, 1992, and how he determined that the Claimant was
incapable of building a new bridge according to the Carrier's standards, The Claimant's
own testimony revealed that he had never built a bridge before. Based on the testimony
elicited at the investigation, the Claimant was disqualified as a B&B foreman. The
discipline was appealed and denied.
The parties being unable to resolve the issue, this matter now comes before this
Board.
This Board has reviewed the evidence and testimony in this case, and we find that
there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the finding that the Claimant was
not qualified to serve as a B&B foreman. The Claimant admitted at the hearing that he
was charged with a doorknob crew and had never performed bridge construction work.
The Claimant could not recall any bridge construction work that he had been involved in
since 1983.
The Second Division held in Award No. 10513 that:
It is still clear that in order for an individual to take advantage of
his rights pursuant to those agreements, a displaced employee must
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Carrier, that he possesses the
necessary qualifications to displace the promoted carman helper.
Without being able to show that he has the necessary skills, an
individual does not have the right to the job.
Performing bridge work is one of the necessary qualifications for being a B&B
foreman. This Board believes that the admissions of the Claimant, coupled with the
2
5 bA 9 A
AW D
ej09
observations of his supervisor, were sufficient to justify the Carrier's action in
disqualifying him from his position. Therefore, the claim will be denied.
AWARD
Claim denied.
EATER . YERS
Neutra Member
Carrier Member Orga 'nation Member
DATED: /- S-5'S g ,i - DATED:~I - 9 S . ~
3