The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Harry Abrahams when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 101, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO (Carmen)
decisions has been limited by law or some clear and unmistakable language in the collective bargaining agreement.
2. The organization bears the burden of producing positive evidence to prove that the carrier acted wrongfully when it effected the disputed changes in the workweek assignments of the thirteen claimant carmen. It has failed to carry this burden.
3. The organization's argument that the carrier acted in violation of Schedule Rule 11(j) is unsound and completely invalid because it assumes a non-existent set of facts.
4. Carmen mechanics have been needed and continuously and regularly assigned to perform car inspection and running repair work at Sioux City on Sundays since long before September 1, 1949. Schedule Rule 11(j) specifically recognizes the propriety of such action.
5. It is of no relevance whatsoever that the carmen mechanics regularly assigned to work at Sioux City on Sundays immediately prior to August 8, 1963, were commonly referred to as "car inspectors". The men so referred to were still "carmen" in the full sense of the word, and the carrier was free to assign them the full range of duties normally performed by carmen at Sioux City on Sundays-mainly car inspections and running repairs.
6. Language in the parties' schedule agreement furnishes ample evidence of the fact that a so-called "car inspector" is nothing more than an ordinary carman mechanic.
7. By admitting that so-called "car inspectors" have been continuously assigned to work at Sioux City on Sundays since before September 1, 1949, the ,Organization has clearly acknowledged the fact that the Sioux City Car Department's operational requirements have necessitated the employment of carmen mechanics seven days a week.
8. Numerous awards of this division recognize that it is the necessity for the performance of work on Sunday-not the job titles of those assigned to perform the work-which is the determining factor in deciding whether rules like Schedule Rule 11(j) have been violated.
For the foregoing reasons, the carrier respectfully requests that this claim 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.