The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Joseph M. McDonald when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 101, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. of L.-C. I. O. (Carmen)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT Oh' FACTS: The Great Northern Railway Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, employs Carmen Antonio Piocos and Charles Meismer, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, at Great Falls, Montana with assigned hours of duty from 7:30 A. M. to 4 P.M. - thirty minutes for lunch.
On May 16, 1960, claimants were instructed by their supervisor to proceed by company highway truck to Cushman, Mont. to rewheel car UTLX 9390 and upon completion of such work assignment that if time did not permit their return to home point at Great Falls by their quitting time, they were to tie up at Harlowton, Montana until 7:30 A. M. the following morning and return to Great Falls during the hours of their assignment at home point.
The duty assigned to be performed at Cushman was completed at 4:30 P. M. In conformity with instructions of their foreman, claimants proceeded to Harlowton where they tied up at 5 P. M., remaining thereat over night until 7:30 A. M. May 17, 1960 to begin their return to Great Falls.
On May 23, 1960, claimants were instructed by their supervisor to proceed by company highway truck to Cushman, Montana to rewheel car CNW 68940, and upon completion of such work assignment, that if time did not permit their return to home point at Great Falls by their quitting time, they were to tie up at Harlowton, Montana until 7:30 A. M. the following morning and return to Great Falls during the hours of their assignment at home point.
2. The organization agrees that the claimants were subject to Schedule Rules 22(a) and 22(b) while performing the work involved in this case.
3. Rule 22(b) clearly allows employes on ordinary road trips to be tied up for a non-compensated rest period of more than five hours at any time "during the time on the road."
4. The lack of limitations on the maximum length of the non-compensated rest period and the time it may be assigned under Rule 22(b) contrast sharply with the more restrictive provisions for assigning rest periods to wrecking service employes under Rule 22(c).
5. The claimants were tied up for overnight rest periods under Rule 22(b) in conformance with the carrier's responsibility and duty to operate its business in a safe, efficient and economical manner.
6. The organization's contentions that rest periods must be given before freight car repairs are completed and then only in the employe's own discretion without any regard for the safety and economy of operations, are obviously illogical, absurd and wholly unsupported by any language in the agreement.
7. The carrier's interpretation of Rules '22(a) and 22(b) is supported by past practice failure of the organization to appeal the decisions of the carrier which rejected previous similar contentions by this organization.
8. Award No. 1637 .-0 this Board, involving rules, facts, and issues directly in point, supports the carrier's position and should be followed in this case.
For the foregoing reasons, the carrier respectfully requests that the claims of the employes 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 facts are essentially the same as in that Award, and the submissions contain the same type of evidence and arguments.
DISSENT OF LABOR MEMBERS TO AWARDS
4270 THROUGH 4275. INCLUSIVE