NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John P. Devaney when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 32, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. OF L. (CARMEN)
"Dispute: Claim of Employes: That Luther E. Gilliatt be restored to service at Gosport, Indiana, and paid for all time lost at the rate of 78¢ per hour, eight (8) hours per day, and six (6) days per week, from April 14, 1939, until restored to service on account of being furloughed April 14, 1939, in violation of Rules 30, 26, and paragraph `B' of the miscellaneous rule, page 24 of current agreement, also, violation of Section VI of the Railway Labor Act, the violation being .the assignment of carmen from other seniority points to do the work formerly performed by Gilliatt."
"This will acknowledge letter of February 18, 1941, from Mr. Jewell, President, Railway Employes' Department, and also letter of March 3, 1941, from Mr. Anderson, Assistant Chief Operating Officer, Chicago, Indianapolis and Louisville Railway, showing that the parties were unable to make an equitable adjustment of the disputes remanded to them under our Dockets 480, 481, 483, 484, 486, 487, 488 and 494. Therefore, the Second Division will accordingly resume consideration of the above dockets and render final awards on the original records."
referee, the request was granted and hearing before Referee John P. Devaney was held on May 20, 1941, and on June 26, 1941, the Division, with Referee John P. Devaney sitting as a member thereof, rendered the following findings and award:
FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the .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.
When the work requirements of a seniority point or assignment have decreased to the extent that the service of even one employe is not required full time, the agreement permits negotiation to protect the interests of the respective parties and prevents any arbitrary change. The disputants have failed to reach an agreement. It is unfair to require the carrier to maintain an employe at a seniority point when the service demands have no reasonable relation to such maintenance unless the agreement compels it. Likewise, it is unfair to permit the carrier to invade the seniority rights of an employe at a particular point because service demands have decreased. The employes and the carrier can negotiate an agreement covering the specific situation which will consider and recognize the equities and rights of each. For this reason, the dispute is remanded with directions to adjust it and report the agreement reached to this Division within ninety days from this date, in lieu of the Division determining the matter as it sees and evaluates the equities.
Claim remanded without prejudice to either disputant in accordance with the above findings.