AH – 505

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

BETWEEN

VIA RAIL CANADA INC.

(the "Corporation")

AND

BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS

(the "Brotherhood")

RE: LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEER TRAINING SELECTION

GRIEVANCE RE INTERVIEW PROCESS – SYLVAIN LANDRY

SOLE ARBITRATOR:                                Michel G. Picher

APPEARING FOR THE BROTHERHOOD:

Scott Chamberlain                – Legal Counsel, Ottawa

J. L. Shields                           – Legal Counsel, Ottawa

John Tofflemire                      – General Chairman, Oakville

APPEARING FOR THE CORPORATION:

E. J. Houlihan                        – Senior Manager, Labour Relations, Montreal

Melanie Bastien                    – Labour Relations Officer, Montreal

APPEARING FOR THE OBSERVER:

Frank O’Neil                          – Labour Relations Associate, CNR, MacMillan Yard

A hearing in this matter was held in Montreal on November 29, 2000

 AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR

            Mr. Landry is an employee of VIA Rail with some eight and one-half years’ service as a brakeman, assistant conductor and conductor.

            The record discloses that Mr. Landry failed three of the five sections of the interview process.

· Decision making skills/ ability to work under minimal supervision

· Dealing with stressful situations

· Ability to respond in emergency situations

In addressing this grievance, in keeping with the principles reviewed in the general companion award, the Arbitrator has made an adjustment with respect to the first portion of the interview process. Specifically, I have awarded the grievor six points which were docked from his score on section A for the quickness with which he responded. There are, however, no other questions within the interview which involve any unfairness to the grievor. Regrettably, his scores in certain of the areas leave much to be desired, and amply justify the relatively low marks assessed. Even with the adjustment of section A, the grievor would remain with fifty-five of a necessary fifty-nine points on section A, seventeen of thirty-three necessary points on section B, twenty-two of forty on section D and eight of twenty-two on section E.

            While the Arbitrator has reviewed a letter written by Mr. Landry to explain his performance, I do not find it persuasive in the circumstances. The grievance must therefore be dismissed.

Dated at Toronto, this 15th day of December 2000

                                                                             _________________________________

                                                                                                MICHEL G. PICHER

                                                                                                      ARBITRATOR