AH339
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
B E T W E E N :
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY COMPANY
(the "Company")
- a n d -
UNITED TRANSPORTATION UNION
(the "Union")
GRIEVANCE OF YARD FOREMAN R.J. LUDLOW OF CALGARY
RE ASSESSMENT OF TWENTY-FIVE (25) DEMERITS
ARBITRATOR : Michel G. Picher
APPEARING FOR
THE COMPANY : K. Hall - Labour Relations Officer, Edmonton
G.C. Blundell - Manager Labour Relations, Edmonton
B. Laidlaw - Labour Relations Officer, Edmonton
L. Umpherville - Manager, Train Service, Edmonton
R. Lefley - Witness
APPEARING FOR
THE UNION : D.W. Ellickson - Counsel, Toronto
J.W. Armstrong - General Chairperson, Edmonton
Mel G. Eldridge - Vice-General Chairperson
Bob Mater - Witness
Randy Ludlow - Grievor, Calgary
A hearing in this matter was held in Edmonton on October 1, 1994.
A W A R D
The facts giving rise to the dispute and the issues are summarized in a joint statement of issue filed at the hearing, which reads as follows :
Dispute
Appeal of the 25 demerits assessed Yard Foreman R.J. Ludlow of Calgary, Alta. for damage to end ramp, Track SO50, and failure to comply with General Operating Instructions Item 13.1(2) on July 21, 1993.
Joint Statement of Issue
Mr. Ludlow was working as Yard Foreman on the 1400 Yard assignment at Sarcee Yard in Calgary on July 21, 1993. As part of the work assigned that day, the crew was required to couple two cars to six cars standing on track SO50. In so doing the loading ramp timbers at the end of the track were damaged. Mr. Ludlow booked off for a period of six days and completed Form 3903 reporting the damage on July 28, 1993.
Following an investigation Yard Foreman Ludlow was assessed 25 demerits.
The Union appealed the 25 demerits assessed Yard Foreman Ludlow on the basis that the discipline was not warranted or was excessive and that the Investigating Officer advised the Union and Yard Foreman that no demerits would be issued.
The Company has denied the appeal.
The arbitrator is satisfied that the facts disclosed warrant a serious degree of discipline, as asserted by the Company. In fact, however, Mr. Ludlow was discharged by reason of the accumulation of demerits involving both the infraction which is the subject of this grievance, and another matter which involves an award of this arbitrator under the same date. He has been out-of-service for over a year, since August 25, 1993. I am satisfied that the substitution of that period as a suspension for his failure to comply with General Operating
Instructions Item 13.1(2) is appropriate. He shall therefore be reinstated into his employment, without compensation and without loss of seniority, with his disciplinary record to stand at 50 demerits. The arbitrator retains jurisdiction in the event of any dispute between the parties in respect of the interpretation or implementation of this award.
DATED at Toronto this 6th day of October, 1994.
_____________________________
Michel G. Picher - Arbitrator