SHP - 16
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION
ONTARIO NORTHLAND RAILWAY
RAILWAY EMPLOYEES’ DEPARTMENT, DIVISION NO. 4
RE:GRIEVANCES OF J. McGIRR AND A. VREBOSCH
SOLE ARBITRATOR: J. F. W. Weatherill
APPEARING FOR THE UNION:
J. H. Clark
APPEARING FOR THE COMPANY:
A hearing in this matter was held in Montreal on April 10, 1975.
AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR
JOINT STATEMENT OF FACT
On August 9, 1972 the auxiliary equipment and the assigned crew were ordered out of North Bay on Train 109 to rerail diesel unit 1305 in Englehart Yard. Train 109 was ordered out of North Bay for 1600 hours and left at 1625, arriving in Englehart at 2330. The auxiliary crew began the work of rerailing the diesel unit the following morning and the diesel was rerailed at 1350. After effecting truck changes and putting away materials, the crew completed their assignment at 1915. The crew car and auxiliary carmen returned to North Bay on Train No. 210 which left Englehart at 0205 and arrived North Bay at 0705 on August 11. The auxiliary crane, auxiliary equipment and the disabled engine were returned to North Bay on Train No. 208 which left Englehart at 1340 and arrived North Bay at 2030 on, the same date. An Englehart based carman was assigned to protect the auxiliary crane and an Englehart based machinist the diesel unit on the return movement.
JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Carmen J. McGirr and A. Vrebosch who were on the auxiliary list claimed entitlement to the work of accompanying the auxiliary equipment, crane and disabled engine from Englehart to North Bay and submitted time tickets accordingly. In this regard it was contended that Rules 6.3 and 58.5 had been violated. The claims wore denied by the Company.
Rules 6.3 and 58.5 are as follows:
6.3 Employees will be called as nearly as possible one hour before leaving time and on their return will deliver tools at points designated.
58.5 Carmen assigned to wrecking crews, including wrecking crane operators, shall be paid for such services as per General Rules, from time called until return to their home station. Meals and lodging will be provided by the Company while crews are on duty in wrecking service.
It is clear from the Joint Statement of Fact that the grievors were not, in the circumstances, required to deliver tools (except perhaps at Englehart), and Rule 6.3 simply has no application in the matter. As to Rule 58.5, it was the Union’s contention that the duties connected with moving this equipment are those of assigned auxiliary crewmen. That rule, however, does not deal with the scope of the auxiliary crew’s work, nor does it prohibit other employees from performing these tasks. It makes specific provisions as to payment, and from the material before me it would appear that those provisions were complied with. The rules referred to do not give the grievors a right to accompany this equipment whenever it may happen to be moved. The effect of any regulations as to the necessity, or the qualifications of persons accompanying such a movement is a separate question, and not one governed by these provisions.
I find that there has been no violation of the provision referred to. Accordingly the grievances are dismissed.
DATED at Toronto, this 26th day of April, 1975.
(sgd.) J. F. W. Weatherill