NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Second Division
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES.-Claim of J. C. Camp, for seniority date of October 25, 1922, on seniority roster Group "A", covering classes listed in Article 4, Rule 18, Section (a), agreement with Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers, effective November 1, 1934, and for difference in rate of pay between that received by him and compensation he contends he would have received on basis of seniority date claimed from April 29, 1925, to date.
JOINT STATEMENT OF FACTS.-J. C. Camp entered service on position of "enginehouse worker", LaGrande, Oregon, October 25, 1922. Transcript of leis personal record shows service since that date as follows
Subsequently he has been employed in various classifications listed in Group B, Rule 1, Article 1-Scope, Firemen & Oilers agreement effective November 1, 1934. He is at this time employed as supplyman, a position listed in Group B, Rule 1, Article 1.
"Rights accruing to employes under their seniority, entitle them to consideration for positions in accordance with their relative length of service with the railroad, as hereinafter provided." Article 4, Rule 18, provides that
"Seniority rights of all employes shall be confined to the point employed and three sub-divisions as follows
"(a) Power plant forces include engineers-in-charge, stationary engineers, stationary firemen, engine room oilers and coal passers.
J. C. Camp's seniority date of April 7, 1925, in this group is the date he held position of stationary fireman. Transcript of his personal record shown above indicates that he held this position for twenty-one days and that this is the only service he performed at any time during his service with the company in a position listed in Rule 18, Group A above.
J. C. Camp declined to subscribe to the conclusions of the joint committee as set forth in the agreement of November 19, 1934, and his contention was the subject of further review by the general chairman and vice president of the International Brotherhood of Firemen & Oilers. This review supported the findings of the joint committee as set forth in the agreement of November 19, 1934.
FINDINGS.-The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all evidence, finds that
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.The Railway Labor Act (as approved June 21, 1934), among its many provisions, prescribes:
"SEc. 2. * * * (4) ; to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes concerning rates of pay, rules, or working conditions; (5) to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions."
"Second. All disputes between a carrier or carriers and its or their employes shall be considered, and, if possible, decided, with all expedition, in conference between representatives designated and authorized so to confer, respectively, by the carrier or carriers and by the employes thereof interested in the dispute."
This dispute was handled in accordance with the above provisions of the amended Railway Labor Act and properly settled between the duly authorized representatives of the employes and the carrier.