CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION

& DISPUTE RESOLUTION

CASE NO. 3870

Heard in Montreal, Thursday, 11 February 2010 Concerning

CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY COMPANY

and

TEAMSTERS CANADA RAIL CONFERENCE

RAIL CANADA TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS

DISPUTE:

Appeal of the assessment of fifteen (15) demerits to Rail Traffic Controller Ian McKoy. JOINT STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On May 29, 2009, Rail Traffic Controller Ian McKoy attended an investigation for his alleged failure to complete delay reporting during his tour of duty on RB-1 on May 25th and 26th, 2009. Following this investigation, the Company assessed Mr. McKoy’s record with 15 demerits for violation of Rail Traffic Controller Manual Item 715 and Blue Notice 01006 dated November 12th, 2001. The Union contends that the assessment of discipline was excessive and not progressive. The Union requests the removal of the 15 demerits from Mr. McKoy’s file. The Company disagrees and denies the Union’s request. FOR THE UNION: FOR THE COMPANY: (SGD.) S. BROWNLEE (SGD.) S. BLACKMORE GENERAL CHAIRWOMAN MANAGER, LABOUR RELATIONS There appeared on behalf of the Company: S. Blackmore – Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton D. S. Fisher – Director, Labour Relations, Montreal G. Séguin – General Superintendent, Regional Operations, Toronto P. Lavoie – Manager, RTC Operations, Toronto And on behalf of the Union: S. Brownlee – General Chairwoman, Stony Plain J. Ruddick – Advisor, Burlington M. Boucher – Vice-General Chairman, Montreal D. Shanahan – Local Chairman, Toronto

CROA&DR 3870

• 2 – R. Leclerc – General Chairman, TCRC(LE), Grand-Mère I. McKoy – Grievor AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR

The Arbitrator is satisfied that discipline was deserved for the grievor’s failure to

properly record train delays into the Company’s computer system, as required, on May

25 and 26, 2009. His response that he had recorded the delays on a train sheet and

that he was relatively new in dealing with the territory to which he was assigned does

not, in the Arbitrator’s view, constitute an answer to an obvious failure to discharge his

responsibilities. While the Arbitrator appreciates that the grievor might have been too

busy to perform the task, it is clear that he had no reason not to alert someone else to

the delays and have the necessary computer entries completed by someone else. In

fact he alerted no one to the problem which his inattention had created.

In the Arbitrator’s view the assessment of fifteen demerits is not unreasonable in

the circumstances, and the grievance must be dismissed.

February 26, 2010 (signed) MICHEL G. PICHER

ARBITRATOR