NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Nicholas H. Zumas when award was rendered.
DEPARTMENT, A. F. L. - C.1. O.
(Sheet Metal Workers)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACT: At Roanoke, Virginia, the Norfolk and Western Railway Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, maintains a Shop known as Roanoke Shops, for the repair of locomotives, cars, and other equipment. Sheet metal workers are employed by the carrier in its Roanoke Shops, to perform their work as specified in the current controlling agreement.
On or about April 17 and June 1, 1967, in the carriers Roanoke Shops, Roanoke, Virginia, sheet metal clothes lockers, all of which comes within the gauge of metal called for in Rule 84, to be used by the Mechanical Department forces in their locker room Smith Shop, were assembled and set up by Norfolk and Western B & B Carpenters, who were assigned to this work under protest by the local committee.
This dispute has been handled with all officers of the carrier designated to handle such disputes, including carrier's highest designated officer, all of whom have declined to make satisfactory adjustment. Correspondence showing the record of handling on the property is attached.
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 dispute involved Rule 84 of the current agreement between the parties, and the assembling of new sheet metal clothes lockers pursuant to instructions as set forth in the record.
The work was performed in Carrier's Roanoke Smith Shop employes room, and that after assembling the lockers they were placed on but not attached to pedestals provided for the lockers.
It is the Organization's contention that such work is covered by Rule 84, because the rule specifically provides for the assembling of sheet metal parts in shop buildings in the mechanical department. Furthermore, such work heretofore had been assigned to the Sheet Metal Workers craft whenever it was performed in the shop buildings at this location.
Carrier contends that Rule 84 does not specifically mention steel or clothes lockers, that the work was performed on new lockers, that the work was only a small part of the total project, and that similar work had been performed by other crafts for many years.
The Board finds that the Organization contentions to be more correct under the conditions in this dispute, namely: The metal clothes lockers required assembling, and were not attached to the building which was located in the building serving shop employes. See Awards 2357 and 2695.
As to part 2-A of the claim, it must be denied. This Board has no injunctive or equitable powers, and cannot direct the Carrier in the conduct of its business. See Wards 4726 and 4264.
As for part 2-B of the claim, it is sustained for wages lost for the reasons found in Third Division Award 14371.
The record indicates that third party notice of the pendency of this dispute was given.