RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION
& DISPUTE RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 3978
CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES DIVISION
Company’s unilateral decision to terminal local rules in
JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
10, 2009, the Company wrote to the
contends that: (1) During the
last round of bargaining the parties agreed that all new local rules would
require the agreement of the Company’s Director of Labour Relations and the
President of the TCRC/MWED. At the same time it was agreed that pre-existing
local rules would stay in force. Appendix E of the Memorandum of Settlement
provided that “both the Company and the
requests that the Company be ordered: (1) to
maintain and to continue to pay the meal allowances in
denies the Union’s contentions and declines the
(SGD.) WM. BREHL (SGD.) K. HEIN
PRESIDENT MANAGER, LABOUR RELATIONS
There appeared on behalf of the Company:
M. Goldsmith –
Labour Relations Officer,
R. Hampel –
There appeared on behalf of the
Wm. Brehl –
D. Brown –
W. Phillips –
AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR
It is common ground that local rules and practices have been established at various locations on the Company’s system, generally involving agreements or understandings which go beyond the content of the collective agreement. An example of such understandings are meal allowances which apparently were paid to crews on the Sudbury and Revelstoke territories when they are required to work beyond certain hours.
On June 6, 2007 the parties made a Memorandum of Settlement which includes, in part, the following:
17(a) All Local Rules are to be approved by the Director Labour Relations and the President (or designate) of the TCRC MWED. The approval process of all Local Rules will eliminate future disagreements with respect to the interpretation of what was agreed and maintain a centralized filing of all such rules.
Refer to Appendix E of this Memorandum of Settlement establishing a new Appendix B-50 in the Collective Agreement concerning a Local Rules Letter.
Additionally, Appendix B-50 was fashioned on the same date, June 6, 2007 to read as follows:
This is in regard to our discussions during negotiations pertaining to the approval process of all local rules.
Effective January 1, 2008 all new local rules will
need to be approved by the Director of
Labour Relations (or designate) and the President (or designate) of the TCRC
MWED. During 2007 both the Company and the
If the foregoing accurately reflects your understanding of this matter, please indicate your concurrence in the space provided below.
notes to the Arbitrator’s attention the fact that in the 2006-2007 round of
12.27 Employees working away from their home location that are not being provided with meal expenses or per diem expenses and are on duty in excess of three hours beyond their regular quit time will be supplied with a meal or a $13.00 meal allowance in lieu thereof.
The practice of continuing to provide meals to employees who return to Boarding Car Outfits under the aforementioned circumstances shall remain in effect.
arises because of two letters sent to the
This is in connection with Appendix B-50 of the June 6, 2007 Memorandum of Settlement and the requirement for the Company and the Union to determine all local rules that are in effect.
As stipulated in Appendix B-50, effective January 1, 2008, all new local rules will need to be approved by the Director of Labour Relations (or designate) and the President of the TCRC-MWED (or designate).
In this regard, the following are the local rules that the parties agree to be in effect prior to January 1, 2008.
The parties agree that any subsequent local rules will be added to this list.
It is agreed that these local rules will remain in effect for the duration of this collective agreement.
These local rules may be cancelled in whole or in part by either party providing 14 days’ written notice.
thereafter, by an email communication dated February 16, 2009 Mr. Seeney
Thank you for providing your clarification by the Company in the letter dated February 10, 2009, concerning a meal allowance on the Sudbury BST for Track employees, this correspondence shall serve as formal notice of the Company’s intention to terminate the Revelstoke B&S Meal provision allowance practice and then apply the proper application of the collective agreement.
In this regard, the Company will process expense claims for Revelstoke B&S Crews, based upon the practice, until such time as the parties conclude the next round of collective bargaining, at which time the Company will revert to the strict application of the collective agreement, as it applies to such matters.
As clarification, the substance of the practice, as understood by the Company, is captured in the April 23, 2008 Draft system Local Rules document, and states as follows:
Revelstoke B&S Crew – Meal provision when working overtime
– Employees working more than four hours beyond their normal quit time will be provided with a $15.00 meal allowance, in the application of section 12.27, employees are not entitled to a duplicate meal allowance payment.
– An employee claiming a per diem allowance is not entitled to the $15.00 meal allowance for working in excess of four hours beyond their normal quit time.
In essence the
Union submits that the additional meal allowance arrangements at both
has substantial difficulty with the
In the instant
In the result,
the Arbitrator is compelled to sustain the position advanced by the Company.
The local rule arrangements at Revelstoke and
It should be
stressed that the observations in this grievance relate entirely to prior
existing practices, and not to new practices which are vetted and approved by
the appropriate officers of both the Company and the
For all of the foregoing reasons the grievance is dismissed.
14 February 2011 (signed) MICHEL G. PICHER