Award No. 3553
Docket No. 3508
2-P&LE-TWUOA-'60
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Mortimer Stone when the award was rendered.
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, RAILROAD
DIVISION, A. F. of L. - C. I. O.
THE PITTSBURGH & LAKE ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY AND
THE LAKE ERIE & EASTERN RAILROAD COMPANY
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES:
On June 7, 1958 two regular men assigned to the car shop were
taken out of the car shop and put to work in the train yard.
At Youngstown we do have an extra board and the men from this
Board should have been used.
The Organization feels that Rule 48 (c)-(2) was violated.
This case is identical to Case Y-16 which the Carrier had the
Organization withdraw from the National Railroad Adjustment Board
and paid the claims.
The Organization requests the Carrier to compensate Extra Car
Inspectors Robinette and Zetts four (4) hours each on account of
Carrier using regular assigned carmen of the shop instead of the
extra car inspectors.
EMPLOYES STATEMENT OF FACTS: This case arose at Youngstown,
Ohio and is known as Case Y-107. At this point there is an extra board for car
inspectors and also a rule as to ho%v these car inspectors are to be used.
The rule involved in this case is Rule 48 (c)-(2) and it was violated by the
carrier.
At this point car repairmen jobs are advertised and so are car inspector
jobs advertised and so awarded.
Instead of using extra car inspectors as per agreement the carrier used car
repairmen to perform the work that belongs to car inspectors by bid and award.
That the Railroad Division, Transport Workers Union of America, AFLCIO does have a bargaining agreement effective May 1, 1945 and revised March
[4697
355:3-.._._12
480
carrier's right to direct the working force as limited by the rules, the
contention of the employes must be denied."
THIRD DIVISION:
Award 8218:
"It is axiomatic that the Carrier has all management prerogatives
not relinquished by Rules Agreements."
FOURTH DIVISION:
Award 1225:
"It is well established that the Board is limited to an interpretation
of the terms and conditions of the applicable agreement and that so long
as its provisions are clear and explicit we may not vary or modify them
by implication. It is also well established that to the extent the contract
does not expressly limit or restrict management's rights and prerogatives, it is free to exercise fully the usual and customary managerial
functions."
An affirmative award in this case would be in direct contradiction W
these rulings of the National Railroad Adjustment Board.
CONCLUSION
The carrier's position may be summed up as follows:
1. Car inspectors and car repairmen are both classified as carmen under Rule 25 of the carmen's agreement and are governed by the
same rules of the same agreement.
2. In the Youngstown Seniority District car inspectors and car
repairmen are combined on one common seniority roster.
3. A previously settled case, relied upon by the organization, is
not similar to the instant case and does not support the contention of
the organization.
4. The work involved herein is carmen's work and was performed
by a carman.
5. Award No. 2174, wherein the claim of the employes was
sustained on the basis that separate rosters for repairmen and
inspectors were in effect, certainly establishes a precedent for a denial
of this claim where repairmen and inspectors are on a single roster and
may be used interchangeably.
6. Awards of the Four Divisions of the National Railroad Adjustment Board support carrier's position.
The carrier respectfully submits that the claim is without merit and therefore must 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
way Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
573-_. _ 13
481
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
As presented this claim involved the same issue as that in Docket No. 3507
ecided by Award No. 3552 except as to the amount claimed.
AWARD
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of SECOND DIVISION
ATTEST: Harry J. Sassaman
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of September 1960.