SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 97, RAILWAY EMPLOYES
DEPT., A. F. of L. - C. I. O.
(Sheet Metal Workers)
THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE
RAILWAY SYSTEM
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Sometime prior to April 11, 1957 (the exact date is unknown) the carrier contracted with Whitnell and Company to install a heating and cooling system in the carrier's freight house office building. This heating and cooling system in the carrier's freight house office building is activated by a package unit with a trade name of "York Air Conditioning Unit". However, this trade name is a misnomer to the common understanding of air conditioning. It is an air conditioning unit to the extent it. either cools or heats the air. This air conditioning unit consisting of four (4) parts-namely, the compressor, the motor, the receiver and the converter, was received unassembled at Albuquerque. These four (4) components of the air
The pipe work involved in this dispute was an integral part of the parcel of combination heating and air conditioning units and was incidental to the installation of the units. This Board has ruled that the carrier is not required to split up work in order to retain a part of it for its employes when such work is incidental to and a part of the whole project as in this case. In Second Division Award 2186, this Board stated-
(1) The primary purpose of the installation was the air conditioning feature which does not come under the provisions of the agreement rules cited by the employes.
(2) The claimants were not qualified to satisfactorily install the complete air conditioning system, since they were inexperienced in that type of work and had not previously performed such service for the carrier.
(3) The pipe work was an integral part of and incidental to the parcel of heating and air conditioning units, therefore, making it impractical to split up the work between the contractor and the carrier's employes .
(4) The claimants did not suffer any monetary loss during the time the heating and air conditioning system was being installed by the contractor (Whitnell and Company).
Carrier directs this Honorable Board's attention to the fact that the employes have made claim to the pipe work at time and one-half rates of pay for April 11, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30 and all other subsequent dates the carrier's records allegedly show that the employes of the contractor (Whitnell and Company) pexlormed the work of installing the piping system in connection with the installation of the heating and air conditioning system. Carrier asserts that the work did not begin on the installation until April 12, 1957 and that this Board has firmly established that claims involving the performance of work by other than the class to which the work is allegedly assigned, if sustained, and the carrier emphatically contends that the employes' claim does not merit such a decision, is sustainable only at the straight-time pro rata rate of pay.
Carrier asserts that the employes' claim is without merit and support of the agreement rules, therefore, respectfully requests this Board to deny it in its entirety.
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. 3559-12
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The carrier engaged an independent contractor to furnish and install in its two story and basement Freight House Office Building at Albuquerque, a centralized air conditioning system consisting of a fifteen ton York air conditioning unit in the basement, water chillers, piping, and a cooling tower erected on the roof. The parts and accessories were delivered and the installation work done by the contractor's employes under a single contract. The employes of the contractor who performed the installation work were factory trained in the installation and servicing of York Corporation's air conditioning systems.
The claimants maintain that a portion of the installation work belonged to them under the sheet metal workers' classification of work rule pertaining to pipe fitting, and that the carrier wrongfully delegated such work to the contractor's employes. Specifically they contend that the installation of all pipe work necessary to carry hot and cold water from the package unit (York air conditioning unit) to the radiators is separate and apart from the installation of the York unit and belongs to sheet metal workers.
The carrier represents that the pipe work was an integral part of the air conditioning system as a whole, that it was impracticable to operate it from the entire undertaking, and to do so would unreasonably interfere with satisfactory completion of the whole project.
The situation disclosed by this record supports the carrier's position. This project should be viewed as a whole in determining whether a proper basis existed for contracting all of the work. The carrier is not required to divide the work by contracting part and retaining part for its employes to perform, where the project is of such a nature as to warrant the reasonable exercise of managerial judgment in contracting hte project as a unit. Award No. 2186 and others therein cited.
In this case it is conceded that the carrier properly contracted for installation of the air conditioning unit, water chillers and cooling tower, and we are unable to say that in the circumstances it was unreasonable for the carrier to include installation of piping in its contract for the air conditioning system as a whole.
The majority in the findings admit that the work involved in this dispute is pipefitting work. Rule 83 of the current agreement reads in part: 3559-13 559