The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in

addition Referee Uvingston Smith when the award was rendered.


PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 122, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'

DEPARTMENT, AFL (Electrical Workers)




DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES:





EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Under date of July 11, 1956, a claim was submitted to Mr. W. D. Lundberg, manager, Calumet shops (Exhibit A, pages 1 and 2) with a request for a hearing which was held on August 29, 1956; a copy of this hearing record is submitted and identified as Exhibit A. This claim was for violation of Rules 2 and 5(w) when management assigned other than electrical workers to the operation of a motor generator to charge batteries.


Under date of September 27, 1956, Manager Lundberg denied our claim; a copy of this denial is submitted and shown as Exhibit B.


Under date of October 2, 1956, we appealed this decision to Mr. Dodds, appeals officer; a copy of this appeal is submitted herewith and identified as Exhibit C.


Under date of November 23, 1956, Mr. Dodds denied our appeal; a copy of this denial is submitted herewith and identified as Exhibit D.


Under date of November 29, 1956, we notified Mr. Dodds, that this decision was not accepted; a copy of this notice is submitted herewith and identified as Exhibit E.



2804-9

32

company has shown that the adjustment claimed is excessive. Finally, .the company has shown that awards of the National Railroad Adjustment Board clearly support the position of the company in this dispute.

FINDINGS: The Second Division of the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

Adjustment Board, upon the

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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.

Claim is here made by the organization that the terms of the effective agreement were violated when electricians covered thereby were not called to operate a Charge-O-Matic HX generator unit used to charge batteries of electric lift trucks assigned for use in the shop storeroom.


The record indicates that electricians performed all electrical maintenance repair on the trucks in question as well as making periodic inspections and tests of the batteries on such vehicular equipment and that the issue here concerns only the charging of batteries thereon.


This function is accomplished by removing a plug on the battery in the truck, plugging in a plug from the Charge-O-Matic machine, setting a timer thereon and pulling a switch. The machine automatically cuts off when the "charge" is completed.


It is clearly evident that no repair, maintenance, inspection or testing is involved in the performance of the above described operation. No special skill or training is required, so therefore we cannot conclude that this work is covered by the Scope Rule of the effective agreement, and therefore subject to performance by electricians, to the exclusion of ail others. See Award 2064.


These claims lack merit.

Claims denied.

ATTEST: Harry J. Sassaman
Executive Secretary

AWARD

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of SECOND DIVISION