Award No. 2828
Docket No. 2869
2-P&LE, LE&E-TWUOA-'58
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA,
AFL-CIO (Railroad Division)
PITTSBURGH & LAKE ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY
AND
LAKE ERIE & EASTERN RAILROAD COMPANY
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES:
A new tractor sweeper is being used
at McKees Rocks, Pa. All tractor machines are run by helpers at this point.
Since a laborer was used to run this tractor, the organization is asking
that Mr. J, Yost, helper, be compensated for three and one-half
(31/2)
hours for
labor doing this work on Friday, February 8, 1957.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
That the operating of tractors
has always been advertised, awarded and considered as helpers work.
That since tractors have been used by the carrier two (2) agreements
have been negotiated with the carrier and the operating of tractors has never
been discussed as the carrier and the organization have always considered this
as helpers work. The organization feels that since this issue was never discussed and that helpers always did this work that past practice in this case is
as good as a rule.
That the carrier now has assigned a laborer to run this tractor.
That helpers are available for this work.
That this case arose at McKees Rocks, Pa., and is known as Case M-127.
That the Railroad Division, Transport Workers Union of America, AFLCIO does have a bargaining agreement, effective May 1, 1948 and revised
March 1, 1956 with the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad Company and the
Lake Erie & Eastern Railroad Company, covering Carmen, their Helpers and
Apprentices, (Car & Locomotive Departments), a copy of which is on file with
the Board and is by reference hereto, made a part of these statement of facts.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES:
That since the operating of tractors has
always been advertised, awarded and considered as helpers work, that this
work be returned to them and not to be done by laborer's. Employes' Exhibits
No. 1, 2 and 3.
[1737
2828-10
182
"The inside hostler attendants were not cut off when the outside
hostler and his helper performed work at Paragould, Arkansas, on
May 1.0, 11 and 12.
"A statement has been made as to the number of engines dispatched or left Paragould, Arkansas, on the three days in question,
but no record has been presented as to the number of engines handled
during the three days. It was also stated that during the three days
period, 15 hours of work was performed by employes coming within
the scope of the Firemen and Oilers' agreement in supplying engines,
or an average of 30 minutes per engine if only the engines dispatched
were counted. In other words, the record shows that the outside
hostler and his helper did not take over all of the work of the inside
hostler attendants but did do part of it.
"With the above understanding this finding is that the claim of
the employes is sustained as to their being wrongfully deprived of
some of their work and the case is sent back to the parties to jointly
work out the payments to be made to employes who should have been
used.
"AWARD
"Case sustained in accordance with
findings."
CONCLUSION:
The carrier has hereinbefore conclusively shown that the work for which
the carmen are making claim is work which has for many, many years belonged to laborers coming under the scope of the firemen and oilers agreement
and has been performed by them. Further, there is no rule in the carmen's
agreement to support the claim and to sustain the claim would in reality be
writing a new rule which the Board is not empowered to do.
E
The carrier respectfully submits the claim is without merit and should be
denied.
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 parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The record in Docket No. 2869 shows that a mechanical sweeper was
placed in service by the carrier for the sole purpose of sweeping floors. The
work performed by this mechanical sweeper had been previously performed
manually by laborers.
2828-11
AWARD
Claim denied as per findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of SECOND DIVISION
ATTEST: Harry J. Sassaman
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of April, 1958.
I