SHP 282

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO NORTHLAND RAILWAY

(the "Company")

- and -

BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY CARMEN OF CANADA

(the "Brotherhood")

GRIEVANCE RE TIME CLAIM AUXILIARY CREWMEN

SOLE ARBITRATOR: M. G. Picher

 

 

APPEARING FOR THE COMPANY:

Michael Restoule Labour Relations Assistant

Ron Leach Chief Mechanical Officer

 

 

APPEARING FOR THE Brotherhood:

Brian Stevens General Chairman

Michael G. Pilon Vice-Chairman

 

 

A hearing in this matter was held in North Bay, Ontario on September 22, 1989.

 

 

AWARD

The facts and issue in this grievance are reflected in the following terms of the statement of fact and statement of issue filed by the Brotherhood:

JOINT STATEMENT OF FACT:

On February 3, 1988, at Timmins, Ontario, a tank car of propane rolled free and struck the side of a locomotive derailing it. A rail crane could not be used to rerail the locomotive as access was blocked by the propane car. Mobile Cranes were therefore used and the ground work was performed by Englehart and Timmins Carmen.

JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE:

The Brotherhood grieved that the Company's only Auxiliary crew, operating out of North Bay, Ontario, should have been called upon based on,

1) The application of Rules 6, 12.1, 58.2, 58.18 of Wage Agreement No. 12

2) that some North Bay Auxiliary equipment was transported by management personnel to the derailment site in Timmins,

3) and the interpretations, spirit and past practice of the applications of the Memorandum of Understanding Between the Ontario Northland Railway and the Brotherhood of Railway Carmen regarding Auxiliary Service, Road Repair Work, Local Work and Overtime at North Bay dated October 20, 1975 and signed, Lyle Davis for the Union and Ken Moorehead for the Company.

and submitted claims of 32 hours each on behalf of Auxiliary Crewmen, J .B. Richardson, A. Schiavo, G.B. Duquette, G.C. Duquette and W. Elliott. The company denied the grievance.

The Brotherhood claims that the auxiliary crew operating out of North Bay should have been called in the instant case. The following provisions of the memorandum of agreement governing overtime assignments are pertinent to the resolution of this grievance.

MAIN LINE DUTY

1. The Regular Auxiliary Crew will be used for all Main Line Derailments for which the Auxiliary crane is required. When meals are to be supplied in the crew car, a carman will be sent as Cook and a helper as Cookee. The duties of the Cook will include looking after the crew cars at the wreck site.

2. Depending on the seriousness of the mishap, when additional men are required, they will be called from the list of spare auxiliary men.

3. When mobile cranes are used in lieu of rail cranes and men are required they will be called from the regular and spare auxiliary lists in seniority order.

In the instant case it is common ground that the auxiliary crane was neither required nor used on the derailment site at Timmins. It is also clear that the cable hook-ups in respect of the mobile crane were performed by Englehart and Timmins carmen. The Arbitrator can find no violation of the memorandum of agreement by the Company in using such available employees to perform the work. The purpose of the memorandum of agreement is plainly to govern the situation when additional employees are required to work on an overtime basis. In the circumstances I am compelled to accept the position of the Company that the mere fact that men are required to perform mainline duty in respect of the use of mobile cranes does not trigger an obligation to assign the work to the North Bay auxiliary crew on an overtime basis. The material before the Arbitrator discloses no violation of the memorandum of agreement respecting overtime, or of rules 6, 12 or 58 of Wage Agreement No. 12.

For the foregoing reasons the grievance is dismissed.

DATED AT TORONTO, this 29th day of September, 1989.

(signed) Michel G. Picher

Arbitrator