The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Ben Harwood when the award was rendered.
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: Claim is herewith presented in behalf of car inspector Fox for:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: This case arose at Youngstown, Ohio and is known as Case Y-146.
Coupling of hose, making air tests and oiling of cars has always been considered as carmen's work at this point, and not trainmen's work.
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 the 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 the work mentioned in the dispute is work that has always been done by car inspectors at this point and the same should have been done in this instant case.
CONCLUSION: Carrier asserts that this claim should be denied for any one or all of the following reasons:
Awards of the National Railroad Adjustment Board have been cited by the carrier in support of its position.
Carrier respectfully submits that the claim is completely devoid of 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.
This controversy concerns a claim that a carman should have been called out to couple air hose, test air brakes and oil cars, work which was allegedly done by a conductor who was a member of a train crew when a draft of cars was being moved from Gateway Yard to "the NYC Yards (McGuffey Drag)". At a later conference, during progress of the claim, it seems to have been admitted that the claim was not correct as to oiling cars, that this was not done by the train crew involved, such crews incidentally not being equipped with the necessary tools or lubrication supplies. Thus, we may confine ourselves to consideration of the claim as to coupling air hose, testing air brakes and closing journal box lids.
It is the position of Carrier that the Carmen's Agreement does not assign to carmen exclusively the tasks of coupling air hose, testing air brakes or closing journal box lids; that Carrier has not contracted away the right to have such work performed as efficiently and economically as possible. Award 2565.
The controlling agreement cited by Claimant is that of May 1, 1948 with revisions to March 1, 1956. Rules 25, "Classification of Work", and 26 "Carmen Helpers" are said to govern. However, as Carrier avers, the rules do not specify nor do they indicate by inference that the work of coupling air hose, 4209-12 734
testing air brakes and closing journal box lids belongs exclusively to carmen. Further, claimant makes no convincing showing that Carrier is incorrect in maintaining that none of these functions has ever been assigned exclusively to any one craft or class of employes on this property either by agreement or by past practice.
We do not find in these rules the closing of journal box lids assigned solely to carmen or carmen helpers and it appears unobjectionable for members of a train crew to do this voluntarily as an incident to moving the train in question.
It is pointed out by Carrier that the testing of air brakes prior to moving cars, as in the situation here considered, would customarily consist of a visual examination by the trainmen as to whether the brakes apply and release on the rear car and also to have a member of the crew observe the train as it pulls out of the yard. It has been held that such an examination is merely incidental to the movement of a train of cars and is not work belonging exclusively to carmen. Award 3340. Such examination is said to be almost universally the practice with trainmen everywhere.
The work of coupling air hose and making an air test, when accomplished by trainmen as an incident to movement of cars as here, has been held work not exclusively reserved to carmen. It is to be noted that the award of Referee Cheney, August 1, 1951, was adopted by this carrier and that the train crew here claimed and were allowed the 95c air hose coupling allowance. And see Award 3714, quoting with approval from above mentioned Award 3340; also, Awards 3339 and 3335. As long ago as May, 1940, in Award 457, this Board, without referee, pointed out the distinction between such work, when performed merely as an incident to duties of train service employes in contrast to its performance "in connection with inspection and repairs to cars". (Emphasis ours). And we find this distinction repeated in Award 1626 and emphasized in Award 1627 where it is said:
A reading of the Cheney Award and Shipley v. P. & L. E. R.R. Go., will readily reveal that they are inapposite. The pertinent Court cases are Virginian 4209-13 735
Ry. Co. v. System Federation No. 40, 57 S. Ct. 592 and Order of R. R. Telegraphers vs. Railway Express Agency, 64 S. Ct. 585.
The awards cited by the majority show a lack of evaluation of Second Division awards. In Award 1372 on the New York Central Railroad, of which the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad Company and the Lake Erie and Eastern Railroad Company are subsidiaries, the parties there, as here, by settlement reached on the property by those in authority to settle such claims, decided that the nature of the instant work was carmen's work and the majority should have so held here.