._. see
Award No. 4907
Docket No. 4828
2-RDG-CM-66
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Donald F. McMahon when award was rendered.
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 109, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO (Carmen)
READING COMPANY
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES:
1. That the Carrier was in violation of current agreement when
assigning Car Inspectors and Helper to exterior cleaning of RDC Cars
-9151, 9155, 9156, 9157, 9158, 9159 and 9160 on the following dates:
April 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, and 30, 1963.
2. That, accordingly, Coach Cleaners Edward Dixon and John
Diehl should be made whole by being paid 8 hours at punitive rate for
each of the following days: April 2.2, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29 and 30, 1963.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Reading Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, assigned car inspectors and carmen helper to
exterior cleaning of RDC Cars 9151, 9155, 9156, 9157, 9158, 9159 and 9160
as follows:
April 22, 1963 -Car Inspector H. Weyman
-Car Inspector F. Pincurek
April 23, 1963 -Car Inspector N. Evans
-Car Inspector G. Morgan
April 24, 1963 -Car Inspector G. Morgan
-Car Inspector F. Pincurek
April 25, 26 and 29, 1963 -Car Inspector H. Weyman
Carman Helper F. Pincurek
April 30, 1963 Carman Helper N. Evans
Carman Helper G. Morgan
The exterior cleaning performed consisted of washing down the cars and was
performed on the first shift at Reading Terminal, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
During the period of the claim there were thirteen (13) coach cleaners
regularly assigned at Reading Terminal, six (6) on the first shift, four (4)
on the second shift and three (3) on the third shift. In addition, there were
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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.
Claim is presented here for Coach Cleaners Edward Dixon and John Diehl,
on the following dates, and for compensation at the punitive rate of pay, April
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29 and 30, 1963, when it is alleged by the Organization that
Carrier assigned Car Inspectors and Helper to perform exterior cleaning RDC
Cars, known as Budd Cars. Such work, it is contended, belongs to Coach Cleaners, and such action it is alleged constitutes a violation of Rules No. 31 and
No. 125, of the effective Agreement between the parties.
Carrier takes the position that the record here shows that no showing has
been made by the Organization that Coach Cleaners have the exclusive right
to perform the work complained of. Rule No. 125 of the Agreement. The rule
refers to "any other unskilled work." Certainly this does not reserve the work
of coach cleaning to coach cleaners exclusively, nor do the provisions of "Rule
No. 108 Classification of Work", specify the work and duties of Car Cleaners.
The Board is of the opinion that the record here does not merit a sustaining award.
The allegations made here do not show a violation of the Agreement by
Carrier.
Claim should be denied.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of SECOND DIVISION
ATTEST: Charles C. McCarthy
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 27th day of June, 1966.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
4907 5