|
Past Practice in Absence of Rule In the absence of a rule or agreement provision, boards have consistently held that past practice is determinative of the rights of the carrier. This is indicated in the following awards: "The practice of having the conductor deliver train
orders in such a case had been followed for many years and we look to past practice in
cases of ambiguity and instances where a rule is not set out in full detail." "No rule is cited in the applicable agreement, and no
established practice appears implying agreement, that carrier may not handle cars of
through freight on its switching local, to be picked up as here shown, by scheduled trains
for moving on to their destination. In the absence of rule the manner of moving traffic
rests in managerial discretion." "The record shows that over a period of many years it
was not unusual for a [suburban] trainman to work with more than one conductor within a
day's assignment. No rule has been cited providing that a trainman be assigned to work his
entire tour of duty with only one conductor. The evidence is that although attempts had
been made through negotiations to secure a crew consist rule, the applicable agreement
clearly does not contain such a rule. In the absence of a rule this Division has no
authority to determine the number of men to be used in a crew."
This page last updated: 03/06/2005 |