CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 4153

Heard in Calgary, Tuesday, 13 November 2012

CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY COMPANY

and

TEAMSTERS CANADA RAIL CONFERENCE

EX PARTE

DISPUTE:

Appeal on behalf of Locomotive Engineer Coleman for the assessment of a thirty (30) day suspension for failure to comply with CROR General Rule A, 311 and 315 by entering a foreman’s limits without authority while called as the engineer on the L57051 10 on April 11, 2012. COMPANY’S STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Locomotive Engineer Coleman was assigned to train L57051 10 departing Lillooet, BC when he was required to protect against Foreman Dekelver at Mile 60 on the Squamish Subdivision. The train failed to stop at Mile 60 and proceeded into Patrol Foreman Dekelver’s limits without permission until the crew was advised via radio by Trainmaster Connal to stop. Train L57051 10 came to a stop at Mile 58.5. The Union finds the discipline excessive based on mitigating circumstances. The Union requested the Company reconsider the discipline assessed and expunge or, in the alternative, reduce the discipline and compensate Locomotive Engineer Coleman for lost wages and benefits. The Company disagrees with the Union’s contentions. FOR THE COMPANY: (SGD.) D. CROSSAN FOR: DIRECTOR, LABOUR RELATIONS There appeared on behalf of the Company: D. Crossan – Manager, Labour Relations, Prince George K. Morris – Sr. Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton D. Brodie – Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton P. Payne – Manager, Labour Relations, Edmonton M. Peterseu – Assistant Superintendent, BC South

CROA 4153

— 2 —

E. Connal – Trainmaster, BC South There appeared on behalf of the Union: M. S. Church – Counsel, Toronto R. Ermet – Vice-General Chairman, Edmonton

AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR

The material before me confirms that on April 11, 2012, the grievor was the

locomotive engineer operating a movement on the Squamish Subdivision. Given the

mountainous conditions, his train was led by a high-rail vehicle operated by Patrol

Foreman Dekelver, who was travelling some three miles ahead. As the movement

advanced, Foreman Dekelver would, by radio communication, give the grievor’s train

permission to enter his limits in three mile increments, having verified the safety of the

track.

It is common ground that the grievor did not have permission from Foreman

Dekelver to proceed past Mile 60 of the Squamish Subdivision. When the foreman was

about to radio the grievor and his conductor to give them that permission, he was

advised by Trainmaster Evan Connal, who was conducting efficiency tests, to make no

radio contact with the grievor’s train. The purpose of that directive was to see whether

the grievor and his conductor would communicate with the foreman before proceeding

beyond Mile 60. In fact they failed to do so, and travelled some 1-1/2 miles into

Foreman Dekelver’s limits without authority. They were then instructed to stop their

train. Following a disciplinary investigation Locomotive Engineer Coleman was

assessed a thirty day suspension, as was his conductor.

CROA 4153

— 3 —

The sole issue in the instant case is the appropriate measure of discipline. A

thirty day suspension is a serious degree of penalty. I cannot, however, disagree with

the Company that the operation of a train into a foreman’s restricted territory without

proper authority is a serious cardinal rule infraction. It was among the most vital

obligations of the grievor and his conductor to be aware of where they were and to

know, at all times, whether they had authority to proceed. That was particularly so in the

conditions in which they were operating, under continuous voice contact with Foreman

Dekelver whose obligation it was to ensure that the road over which they were to travel

was safe for passage in relatively perilous mountain terrain. I am compelled to conclude

that the grievor’s negligence did sustain the penalty imposed.

In the result, the grievance must be dismissed.

November 19, 2012 SIGNED

MICHEL G. PICHER

ARBITRATOR