CLEVELAND, August 14 — Yesterday in St. Louis, arbitrator Francis X. Quinn heard argument from the BLE, UTU, and rail carriers involved in the dispute over remote control assignments on the procedural question of how the merits arbitration board should break a deadlock.
The parties formally agreed on June 25, 2002, that they would submit the dispute to a Special Board of Adjustment made up of three partisan members and a neutral Chairman. They could not agree, however, on what should happen if that Board splits 2-2. Consequently, arbitrator Quinn was selected as Procedural Neutral to resolve this issue.
Three proposed solutions were presented to him: BLE proposed that “in the event of a deadlock, the vote of the neutral Chairman shall become determinative and he shall have the authority to issue an Award over his signature only.”
UTU proposed no tie-breaking mechanism be established and that no award could issue without agreement of the majority of the 4-person board. The carriers proposed that a second neutral be appointed to the Board, who would attend all Board hearings and consider the written filings (but who would not participate in the Board’s executive sessions or deliberations) and then cast a determinative sealed vote that would be unsealed in the event of a deadlock.
Arbitrator Quinn told the parties that he would reveal his selection from the three options on Friday August 16.