NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee I. L. Sharfman when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 6, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. OF L. (ELECTRICAL WORKERS)
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: That Electrician Charles Rapp, employed on the 8:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M. shift, be compensated at the rate of time and one-half for electrical work performed on passenger car electric fixtures as follows:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: At 51st Street, Chicago, Illinois, the carrier assigned car carpenter and carman helper, employed on the 8:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M. shift, to dismantle and assemble fluorescent lighting fixtures and remove shades for cleaning on the following dates, in violation of Rules 101 and 27 of the current agreement.
On December 31, 1942, a carman worked overtime from 4:00 P. M. to 10:00 P. M., six hours, in Car 423.
On January 1, 1943, a car carpenter worked from 4:00 P. M. to 10:00 P. M., six hours, in Car 424.
On January 6, 1943, a car carpenter and car carpenter helper worked five hours' overtime in Car 422.
In an effort to sustain its position the carrier refers to last paragraph of Rule 101 reading as follows:
What the employes are asking is this: That an electrician will be called from regular mechanics' work to unscrew the shade, wait until the coach cleaner washes both sides of the shade and then have the electricians put the shade back in place. We feel such a procedure cannot be justified under the provisions of the rule governing the work of mechanics and certainly no justification can be found under present conditions for such a waste of time.
As the work these coach cleaners are performing, and the work the carmen did perform in the few instances covered by this claim, in connection with cleaning these shades, is not "electrical" work or any other work covered by the electricians' agreement, nor is it mechanics' work, the claim should be denied.
At the hearing we may desire, with permission of the Board, to demonstrate visually to the Board just what is involved in this dispute.
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.
The evidence of record supports the conclusion that the work of removing and restoring the shades of electric lighting fixtures in connection with the washing and cleaning of such shades, as disclosed in this proceeding, does not constitute electrical work within the terms of the controlling agreement, and that the failure to use electricians for this work did not constitute a violation of that agreement.