A
= . p r. ,'~" ~'' ' c U N
o
o °' ; G
z z en d
w a
~o p to ' o
a
a `a. LI
x `" ~o
bw(J)
o°
3
'~ ~a ~.~
N>
y,
v
O
~~
a~° a
~~, ao~ Uo
~,~ d v
0xr.
s
~.b
N~.4t
.~3~
~a,~,
w
~~
C p·
~~
b°~
~ x
~~ ~ " ~ o
~ ~ ~'~ o
~w~w~
Asp ~ ~s
b °`~wWAOa~z
bo ba
o
b 4)o b
A ' 'c°
O
..~ W '~ ~ ~ ~, ~d~l~-;E-~P
.~A ~o
a
a
b
N p ~. [~ en
ca
o
^~ ~o °~ +'~ `c~
.~ ""' M >, do a
A 4-4
o i fJ. p, a~ .~ o .e 2 .5 -M V b °' U __,
p p V0 e ~~>~ w aces wd~ I
z w
U
w
ig .0 t o
u ; N y U .a U C's A OD
P-4 N.
V N
'O ^" b y~.,i U N c'q ~n
o, w
a
w x o '~Na ag~a a dwb *4 a w3
'Z cd 10,
nom A W U w~ ~2aH ha.~ eu~t,~
o W H A 3 U °A °3o a.?~ ~'~.o
~~ w
N.0O-q.o xi~
7~1 ~Y N N N L'7
A a ~~~8
ILI 0oa a wN
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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Paragraph 4 of Rule 96 provides as follows:
"(4) When wrecking crews are called for wrecks or derailments outside
of yard limits, the regularly assigned crew will accompany the outfit.
For wrecks or derailments within yard limits, sufficient carmen will be
called to perform the work."
The Ridgeley crane and operator were not used to rerail cars within the
Hagerstown yard limits on December 21st and 22nd, and outside of the Hagertown yard limits on December 23rd, 1962. The Ridgeley wrecking crew was
used with them on the 23rd, but not on the other two days, the Carrier contending
that they were not required by the rule because the derailment was within the
yard limits of Hagerstown. The employes contend that "yard limits" refer to
those of the wrecking crew and not the place of derailment.
Awards Nos. 853 and 857 are the earliest awards cited concerning this and
similar rules. The record of Award No. 853 indicate that it was the first claim
of the kind to be decided by this Division; it also shows that a Cedar Rapids
wrecker was sent "to Montieth, Iowa (a station * * *)" to rerail an engine. This
suggests, but does not affirmatively show, that the derailment was within Montieth
yard limits; however, without examining into or commenting upon that circumstance, the claim was sustained under an identical rule with Rule 96(4).
In Award No. 857 the claim was sustained under a rule which differed only in
requiring "a sufficient number of the regularly assigned crew." The derailment
was "at Burt Street, Syracuse," where an overpass was being constructed within
city limits, and presumably within yard limits; but that point was not discussed.
Both Awards Nos. 853 and 857 were made without referees, and indicate
that in 1942 this Division considered "yard limits" to mean those of the wrecking
crew's home point, since they were not concerned with the exact locations of
the derailments.
In Award No. 1069, this Division stated its understanding of the rule when
it said:
"The question to be determined is whether or not the entire wrecking
crew from the New Haven should have been called to accompany the New
Haven wrecking outfit. * * *
Since this was a wreck outside the yard limits insofar as the New
Haven crew was concerned, * * * the regularly assigned crew should have
accompanied the outfit. There was a violation of the agreement."
In Award No. 1362 the carrier admitted the violation of a rule like that in
4837 5
Award No. 857, but contested the pay rate. In that instance the derailment was
at the Paragould turn-table pit, which must have been within yard limits there.
Without express reference to the point of derailment the claim of the Poplar Bluff
wrecking crew was sustained.
In Award No. 1702 this Division said:
"Carrier also says this work was done within the yard limits at
Armourdale and therefore the wrecking outfit was not taken `outside of
yard limits' within the meaning of the rule. We think the language `outside
of yard limits' as contained in Rule 114 relates to where the wrecking
crews are assigned to their respective outfits which, as far as No. 95008 is
concerned, was Des Moines.
Award of this Division have held, under like or comparable rules,
that the regularly assigned wrecking crew must accompany the outfit when
taken for service outside of yard limits. See Awards 853, 857, 1609 and
1362."
No awards to the contrary have been cited, and the question seems not to
have been raised subsequently until the present claim, due to the fact that in
each controversy the parties have differed upon other grounds that the interpretation of this provision.
Claim 2 is for pay for the total 22 hours between the call of the crane operator on December 21 and his release at home point on the 22nd. In Award
No. 1702 this Division stated the measure of compensation for work lost as
"the pro rata rate of the position, that is, the rate which the occupant
of the regular position to whom it belonged would have received if he
had performed the work. This would eliminate all traveling and waiting
time but would entitle claimants to be paid at the rate of their position for
all time paid Wrecking Engineer Frank Walters, either pro rata or overtime, while he worked with outfit No. 95008 at Armourdale. See Award
1362 to the same effect."
A W A R D
Claim 1 sustained.
Claim 2 sustained as per findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of SECOND DIVISION
ATTEST: Charles C. McCarthy
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this Ilth day of March, 1966.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
4837