"The Carrier representative maintains that the procedural argument was never cited
in the Statement of Claim and is, therefore, beyond the jurisdiction of this Board.
Jurisdictional issues can be raised at any time in the progression of a Claim (Third
Division Awards 20832, 20165,
19527). Circular No. 1 relates to the form of the Submission
stating that the Statement of Claim 'must clearly state the particular question upon which
an award is desired.' Carrier's representative notes that there is decisional authority
which holds that a failure to include procedural issues in the Statement of Claim before
this Board is fatal and, as such, any such prior arguments are waived (Third Division
Awards 21543, 19790,
19507, 19306,
18239, 17525,
17512, 16955,
15523, 10904,
8426, 6954).
"We have carefully reviewed each of the above-cited Awards and find that only
Third Division Award 21543 stands on point with the issue at bar. All other Awards relate
to arguments made which were not a part of the Claim on the property, or substantive
issues and Rules raised which were waived on the property prior to appeal. In Award
21543 we have a procedural time limit issue which is rejected in that the
'claimant failed to
make this a part of his formal statement of claim.' The reasoning of that Award is
twofold. First, that a review of prior Awards finds only one exception (Third Division
Award 20763) 'contrary to the general view reflected in the Awards that the time limits
issue must be included in the formal claim' and second, that the procedural issue was not
firmly grounded.
"The procedural issue before us was raised on the property and has been `handled
in the usual manner up to and including the chief operating officer of the carrier
designated to handle such dispute.' Unlike Award 21543, which stated that
'no other
evidence or comment was made concerning the time limit rule on the property,' the issue
before us was firmly grounded on the property and discussed in the usual manner before
this Claim came to the Board. Unlike Award 21543, the Organization's representative argues
that past disputes between the same parties have ruled on procedural objections wherein
the Claim did not cite such Rule or issue to be decided. In Fourth Division Awards
2917
and 1789 the procedural issue was denied. In Fourth Division Awards
4211, 4042 and
3797,
the Claim was sustained on procedural grounds although it was not mentioned in the
Statement of Claim before the Board. Accordingly, we will reject the jurisdictional
argument."