corm 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6332
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6148
 2-B&M-CM-'72
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in . ~~
 addition Referee Robert G. Williams when award was rendered.
 L
 ( System Federation No. 18, Railway Employes'
 ( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0. ,~~~ .
 Parties to Dispute; ( (Carmen,)

Dispute: Claim of Employes:








_indings:
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 in this-case are undisputed: The Carrier dispatched a wrecking crew which included all of the claimants. When the claimants completed their assigned duties, they were transported from the scene of the derailment by automobile and arrived at their headquarters at 7:00 P.M. on January 8, 1971. The wrecking outfit, on the other hand., arrived at headquarters at 11:30 P.M- on January 8, 1971. The claimants claim four (4) hours and thirty (30) minutes pair for each of them.

 To support their case., the claimants rely on Rule 113 of their agreement which provides:
 Form 1 Award No. 6332
 Page 2 Docket No. 6148
 2-B&1·1-CM-' 72







A long line of precedents have established the principle that a wrecking crew is entitled to compensation for the time an outfit leaves its yard and travels to the site of a wreck or derailment. See Awards 857, 1702, 2185, 2404, 3365, 4280, 4675, and other decisions. This case presents the question of whether or not a wrecking crew member is entitled to compensation for the time between the departure from the wreck site and return of a wrecking outfit to its. yard.

 The Carrier has introduced evidence tending to show that the original purpose of this rule authorized Carriers to require a crew to accompany the wrecking outfit. The rule was first promulgated in 1919 and later interpretations support this proposition. Apparently, the rule originally was designed to protect the Carrier by assuring that it could require a sufficient number of wrecking crew members to travel to the site of a wreck or derailment so the work could be completed. In those early days of uncertain transportation the Carrier would be assured that a crew would be available at the wreck site and would not be late or absent because they used some other means of transportation. In other words the rule originally was designed to protect Carriers, and now employees are claiming that it assures them compensation for time not C worked.

 The principle of allowing compensation for the time a wrecking outfit departs its yard and arrives at the wreck or derailment site is well established in prior awards and should not be overturned by this Board. These prior awards rely on the phrase "will . accompany the outfit" to sustain claims. This phrase, however, is prefaced with the clause "when wrecking crews are called." The term "called" means "to summons." Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Read in its entirety Rule 113 means that when crews axe "called" or "summoned" to work they shall "accompany the outfit." Rule 113 does not state that when crews complete an assignment they shall "accompany the outfit."

 The Organization cites numerous cases to support its contention but most of these awards involve fact situations with claimants who were called and did not accompany the outfit to the wreck site.

 Second Division Awards 5678 and 5784, however, involved claimants who did not accompany the outfit going to and coming from a wreck or derailment site. Award 5678 (Referee Ritter) sustained the claim citing awards involving time to a wreck site without discussing the question of the application of Rule 113 to the return trip. Award 5784 (Referee McGovern) sustained a claim also without considering the applicability, of Rule 113 to the return trip.

 The language of Rule 113 is clear and unambiguous. When wrecking crews are called they will accompany the outfit to the wreck or derailment site or must be ccunpensated for this time if another method of transportation is used. Rule 113 does not provide for crews to accompany an outfit on a return trip. This Board does not
                                                                i


        s


Form 1 Award No. 6332
 Page 3 Docket No. 6148
 2-B&M-CM-'72

 have the authority to add to, alter or modify a contract provision so the claim must be denied.

                            A W. A R D


        Claim denied.


                                    NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD By Order of Second Division


                                    Attest:

            p

            Executive Secretary


                                    Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of July, 1972.

              LABOR ME NIBERS '

              DISSENT TO A'AARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148


        U. S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, in a landmark railroad case V, decided in 1950, more clearly than anyone, the reasons for the existence of the National Railroad Adjustment Board.


                ."The Adjustment Board is well equipped to exercise its congressionally imposed functions. Its members understand rail road problems and speak the railroad jargon. Long and varied experiences have added to the Board's initial qualifications. Precedents established by it, while not necessarily binding, provide opportunities for a desirable degree of uniformity in the interpretation of agree-

( ments throughout the Nation's railway
                systems."


        in this award neither of the two prominent guidelines or purposes have been met. The Organization's problems in this case was simply ignored. Little more than double talk was given to the desirability for any measure of uniformity in the award working proces^. As a result of this award, the Employes of the Carmen craft will be deprived of an undetermined amount of money.


                "Rule 1.13. When wrecking crews are called for wrecks or derailments outside of yard limits, the regularly assianed crew will accompany the outfit. For wrecks or derailments.withi.n yard? limits, sufficient carmen will be called to Perform the work."


          Slocum v. Dclaware, i,ackawanna & western Railroad,

          339 U.S. 239, <<* L. ed 795 (1950)

LABOR MEMBERS '
 DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 2

 The majority stated this rule was first promulgated in 1919 and was apparently designed to protect the carrier~by, assuring it could require a sufficient number of wrecking.. crew members to travel to the site of a wreck or derailment in order that the work could be completed. However, we submit that the rule was also designed to protect the wrecking crew so they would have a means of transportation to and from the wreck site and be paid from the time the wrecking outfit left home point until said outfit returned to home point. This is in accordance with the rule governing "Overtime, Emergency Service Road Work". This is substantiated by the fz~ct that in 1919 the principal mode of transportation was railrcads. Any other. forms of transportation were not as dependable or as efficient as railroads.

 The interpretation r.-,f the above quoted- rule was made by the United States 1?:z i lro~:d I:dmini stration - Railway Board of Adjustment I-To. 2 in Docket No. 9C3, decision rendered -November 20, 1919. The question in Docket No. 983:

 "question . . . Shall the' regularly assigned wrecking crew at Greenville be paid for aIlhaur.s they would have made if permitted to accompany wrecker to Letots?"

 The Employer, ~ in their position, stated in part:

 '~ It was a deliberate failure on the part of the Company to comply with parac.·,taph E, r;zIc·_ 0; are, we "ask p;zy for all hours the wrc cki_nd cr::vr would have. made if pexwitted to accompany the wrecher."

 "Decision

 The r,zerzbers of the regularly assigned wrecl:i_ng cre%.., in question will be p.--,.id for a.)_1. hours ttzc y r,,·r;ula ?ivc :t;auc' tzzd they been ~~c rnii. ;:tee' to ~:rror:~;~.:ny wr. ocher t0 In' tOtS , Texas."
    LA30R MEMBERS'

    . DISSENT TO AWARD N0. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 3


Docket No. 1437, United States Railroad Administration, Railway Board of Adjustment No. 2, May 20, 1920.

          "QUESTION:..Should wreckers travel back and forth on passenger trains or remain . with outfit?


          "EMPLOYES' POSITION


          "This is a regularly assigned wrecking crew and as the calls are for wrecks or derailments outside the yard limits they should, according to rule 158 of the

. National Agreement, accompany the wrecking
          outfit to wrecks oz derailments and remain

          with the outfit until it is returned to

          home station..


                      "DECISION


          "In accordance with the provisions of rule

          1.58 of the National Agreement, the regularly

          assigned wrecking crew will accompany the

          wrecker outfit when it is sent outside of _

          yard limits to do wrecking work. (See letter

          on this subject dated March 12, to A. H.

          Smith, president of the Cleveland, Cincinnati,

          Chicago & St. Louis Railroad, from Mr. Frank

          McManamy, Assistant Director.)"


The above referred~to letter is as follows:

          "Mr. A. H. Smith, President Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis R. R. Grand Central. Terminal New York, N. Y.


          "Dear'Sir: The National Agreement between the Director General of Railroads and the shop crafts bccane cffecti_ve Octcoer 20, 191.9. various rt.c>!stion, t:.:, vn been bonding as to the interPretat.on aan6 appli..cat=i.cn of that agreetnent.

' , LABOR MEMBERS'
 DISSENT TO ANARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148, page., 4

      ,. "Among these was the question covered by letter from the Federal Manager of_the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad to Mr. W. S. Carter, Director of the Division of Labor, as to the application of Rule 157 of the Nat-ional Agreement. The conclusion has been reached that the rule so far as it relates to the question raised is clear as written and, therefore, no interpretation is necessary.


    "Concerning the question raised as to whether or' not wrecking crews may be sent to point of wreck on passenger train and returned to home station in the same manner, instead of accompanying wreck, beg to advise Rule 1.58 provides, 'j1hen wrecking crews are called

_. for wrecks or derailments outside of yard .
    limits, the regularly assigned crew will ac

    company outfit.' .It was not the intent of this

    rule to prohibit sending wrecking crew to home

    station by passenger train in advance of the

    wrecking outfit.


    "I shall be obliged, therefore, if you will arrange on behalf- of the Railroad Administration, for. such readjustments, if antr, as may . be ccn.l] ed for in accordance with this letter for f:he period from October 20, 101.9, to February 29, 1920, inclusive. .


                    Yours very truly, (Sinned) FRANK McM.3NAMY Manager, Department of Equipment."

      _LABOR MEMBERS

      DISSENT T O AWARD ^O. 63 3 2 , DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 5


Also see letter dated March 12, 1920 to J. H. Hannaford, Northern Pacific Railroad, from Frank I:cManamy, Assistant Director.

          "Mr. J. Fi. Hannaford, President Northern Pacific Railroad, St. Paul, Minn.


              "Dear Sir: The National Agreement'

          between the Director General of Railroad::

' and the shop crafts became effective
          October 20, 1919. Various questions have

          been pending as to the interpretation and

          application e3: that agreement. '


              "Among them was the question covered

' by letter from the General Manager of the.
          Northern Pacific Railroad to Mr. W. S.

          Carter, Director of the Division of Labor,

          as to the application of Rule 157 of the

          National Agreement. The conclusion has been

          reached that the rule so far us it relates

          to the c_ruestion raised is clear as written,

          and therefore, no interpretation is necessary.


              "With reference to the question raised

          as to whether. or not it is permissible after .

          clearing away the wreck to send a portion or.

          all of the wreck crew back to their. home

          terminal on « passenger train in advance of

          the wrecking outfit, beg to advise this rule

          does not prohibit the sending of a portion

          or all of the wrecking crew back to home.

          terminal on passenger train in advtince of

          the wrecl~ i.ng outfit.


          "The question raised ass to calling empJ.oyes for. wrec_Ker service i s clearly

          covered by Rule 10..

        LABOR MEMBERS '

        DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 6

        "T shall be obliged, therefore, if you

        will arrange on behalf of the Railroad .,

        Administration for such. readjustments, i.f ,. _,

        any, as may be called for in accordance

        with this letter for the period from

        October 20, 1919, to February 29, 1920.

        Yours very truly,


                (Signed) FRANK McMANAMY

                        Manager, Dept. of Equipment."


Docket No ..1602, July 20, 1920, United States Railroad
 Administration, Railway Board of Adjustment No. 2..

          "QUESTION:--Under rule 158 is it obligatory for the railroad to send outside of yard limits the wrecker and full wrecking crew

          in cases of slight derailments where a.

          limited number of men, not necessarily the

          full crew of the wrecker, are required, or

          should the sending of the wrecker and full

          crew be left subject to discretion of the

          management as has been the past practice?


          _ "Is-it the intention to call sufficient men from the.regularly assigned wrecking crew for wrecks or derailments within the terminal or yard limits, or is it the intention to use other cnrmen for this service?


                        DEC Is TON


            . "In case the wrecking outfit is used

        _ on wreclzs or c'erail.rr:e-~m Ls outs i.d e the yard

        _l.imits, th^ full regul.~zrl y assigned crew

        will accoMr-·;:ny same.

      .. LABOR MEMBERS'


      DISSENT TO AWARD N0. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 7

                                                          I


          "For slight derailments and other work

          outside of the yard limits, when the wreck

          ing outfit is not used,-a sufficient number

          of carmen will be sent out to perform the

          work.

          "For wrecks or derailments within the

          yard linA;:s, men of the reaularly assigned

          wrecking crew or other carmen will be used

          -as may be deemed necessary.


                      RAILWAY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 2, R. J. TURNBULL, Chairman.


          Washington, D. C., July 20, 1920."


Docket No. 2213, December 14, 1920, United States Railroad
 Administration; Director General of Railroads, Railway Board
    Adjustment No. 2.'


          "QUESTION:--What number of men is considered a full wrecking crew - Rule 158 of the National Agreement?


    _ _ "EMPLOYEES' POSITION;

          "On a .recent date two loaded cars were derailed at Montpelier, Ind. The management called out three members of the wrecking crew to put the cars back on the rails. These men urere called from the wrecking crew at Muncie, Ind. They took along with them the block car and did not take the wrecking derrick.

                                                C;


                                                  Moo


LABOR tIEMBERS
 DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 8
 , ''We contend that Rule 158 provides
 for the taking of the full wrecking crew
 along on,a job of this nature when it is
 outside of the yard limits, which was the '
 case in this instance, as Montpelier is
 out of the yard limits of Muncie. We
 further contend that the wrecking derrick
 does not-necessarily have to accompany
 outfit on wrecks or derailments outside
 to warrant the taking of the full wrecking
 crew _ with t-r F , h··'- tha 4- the block car in
    cases of this nature constitutes the outfit.


    "RAILROAD'S POSITION:


"It has been our practice to send enough men with the wrecking outfit to clean up the wreck. If it is a large wreck, we' - ..c~ . naturally send more men than if it is only - ;a car derailment. We have been unable to

 find any interpretation or decision which specifies the number of men to be considered a full wrecking crew, and for that reason we
 have followed our past practice of only _
 sending enough men to take care of the wreck.
              "DECISION


"In case the wrecking outfit is used
 on wrecks or derai lments outside the vard
 limits, the fall regularly assigned crew
 will. acc~rn~->a~ same: ,
 "For slight derailments and other work
 outside of the yard limits, when the wreck
 ing outfit is riot used, a sufficient number
 of carmen will be sent out to periform the
 work. C
        LABOR MEMBERS'

        DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 9


                                                          i


                    "RAILWAY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 2 R. J. TURNBULL,.Chairman.


          Wash.:ng on, D. C., December 14, 1920."


The majority interpreted the Dockets of the United States Railroad Administ::ation - Railway Board of Adjustment No. 2 and the two letters quoted there to mean that the carriers were relieved of their. obligation to pay the wrecking crew the same amount of time that it took the wrecking outfit to depart and arrive back at home station. A close scrutiny of these dockets and letters reveals that the question asked was concerning transportAtion and not pay. The question of pay had already been settled by this Board in Docket-No':-983, dated November: 20, 1919, quoted hereinbefore. A close examination of this docket will reveal the wrecking drew was paid for the number of hours they would have made if they had accompanied the outfit. This principle was folloeed in Dockets Nos. 1602 and 2213, decisions rendered July 20, 1920 and December 14, 1.920 respectively.

 The question of pay did not arise again until the Second Division's National Railroad Adjustmcnt Board was established. Award Nos: 857, 1362., 2.185, 3936, 4785, 432, 4972, 5678, 5784 and others followed the principle of allowing the wrecking crew pay when not allowed to accompany the wrecking outfit.

 Award Nos. 5678 and 5784 were specifically pointed out to the referee, they being the two latest awards of this Board. The majority dismissed these awards as not being relevant because the referees did not discuss the application of Rule 113 'no r. consider the application of: said rule on the return trip. 11 study of the submissions of the Carriers and Employes, as well as the Findiric's in these Awards, will prove that such a statement made by the majority was not based upon fact. The only conclusion that care be made is that they were on a fishing expcdition in an ~,t:.rr~p~ to justify their erroneous decision.
 n 0
 FJ r · o H. 0 Y

 E~' O L" P N UI Pi P!

 r- o a.

 ,. Pl !' = 1- CO, - m

 A z t 0 zi pi 0 :g rt ?I Q,
 O W Zi O O 0

 n :n rt O . ~ ~- ~ r~

 o · 0 m O M n r· P
 n - Oj G ~r O :r N·
 b ~ rt ~ ~ U n ft ·~

 r00~·.^.'O~x
 rw .~ ~ cn · c~

 rh f:- ;D 9 21) It", . · r-3

 7 o rt
 c~ ~ n ~ n H N tNn

 rt f; ,7t ~~ CD Cn ''~
 t': ^..~ C!a ',T :3 G `~1'' CD ::F'
h1 ': O CJ 0a u) ct r~
 r· w cD L-4 n rr 0 ^~
 u. N v. 10 fn
 · ~ U?tDeM.rtiW

 ~rth'~rr~I)OOx

 r
        f7; vi


0 (D V.
 ~ a~

 n N rt `~ Y·
 rt.~ Ob

 ~t ..

 rt 'u m Y· Ct

 N ~· Qa t~ ~ ;a c~ r~ r., -

 O O . "t O r--j
 C) ~ fi Ua n x

 Y- i~ f~ W G rt 0

    t~ rYfr

0 ~r to
 ~l (D
 ~r (D
 rt a
 n m F2
          · ~·


. t'J 11 E - C· 0 f%·

 r~ 'O O r W Dt 0

 ;~ n rt o
 O O' m t' O

 n Cu ril rt Y N

 ....

 O ~ 0 G O ~ O

 t ¢a r· G n O O
 H ul m n r0 r `Q

 o

      PV 0


L ~0..r-°c.w.~

 a~< n cas rro :j

 O K !~
 fxD rt . N

r., r-

 ~- n cfi crD

 !D

 o .. r~

 n

 0 ti :f 0

 pi z

 iv CD Y· '",~
 1-j t'~ !ti Y.

 G

 c~ 0
 v
 C it
 ~ x.
 Q. .
 Q Q.

 wm
 t~

 In 0

 rt '. .,

 0 y_. ft rx . , w axe

 . o

 H (D :C

 rt W
 :r fl
 CD 0
 O r~
 G7
 i.'~ ft
 r
 rt
 ~ n

 A

 ~ i~
 0

 U) Y· CJ
 (D :3 rn
 C. "~ t::r
 D Dr

 O o r c0 'D
 rt :3
 ::r ai
 W 0 O
 G o

 p-.. h, ten.

 ,` w n ~
 wr ~
 ~n .w v o o.

 rt y .~

 rt~
 49 W

 c
 ~ m d Y·
 n ~·

 fi

 ~ C

 10

 n

 0 of

 ,:3 0

 O

 N Hn ~ a
 0~ Y J1
 G Ort,:(D. H

 o.~ o
 co 'I

 .P O .0A rt~ ~
 fi m O' d

 O per .
 M to P-a :3 0

        w

Y· W N
 0
    O


N

 ::r t7l

 N
 0
 a a~

 J
 00
      LABOR MEMBERS'

      DISSENT TO AWARD h0. 63-32., DOCKET 170. 6148 Page 11


In Award No. 4471 of this Division, Referee Anrod stated:
    _. " I. The law of labor relations is _

    well established that the rights and r

    obligations of the parties to a labor

    - agreement must be ascertained by reading

. . the agreement in its entirety, rather -
          than from isolated parts or fragments.

          Single sentences or sections cannot be - ,._

          isolated from the context in which they . _,_

          appear and be construed independently,

_, _ with disregard for the apparent intent
 . and understanding of the parties as
          evidenced by the entire agreement. The

          meaning of each section or sentence

          must be determined_by reading all rele

          vant sections and sentences together and.-.

          coordinating them in order to accomplish.

          their evident aim and intent. See

          Awards 4130, 4190, 4192, 4335, 4337, and

          4362 of the Second Division."


Therefore; Rule 113 and other rules of the Agreement pertaining to wrecking crews and hover they are paid must be read in their entirety ra:.her than words or sentences.

 The peczsions i.n Dockets of the Rallway Board of Adjust ment No, 2 as quoted hereinabove, as well as the awards referred to aOove, were based upon analyzing the entire rule in conjunction with the facts of record, and not upon one word within the rule.

                                        -

LABOR MFrt»ERS '
 DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 633?, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page 12

 We believe the referee, for some unknown reason,-i~,as grasping vainly for an excuse to deny this case irrespective of common sense, knowledge of the railroad industry and precedents established by this Board.

 In prior awards, this Board had established a degree of uniformity in the interpretation of the agreement regard-4 ~ng wrecking crc%as being paid when not allowed to accompany the outfit to and from z derailment. The referee, in his decision.for reasons off: his own, has attempted to destroy that uniformity. Further, the referee ignored the language interpreting the rule and practice in the industry over the years in the awards cited hereinabove. .

 The Carrier, by their actions in this dispute, have changed the rules and working conditions of the employes involved. The majority, by the Award, permits them to do this. The Railway Labor Act does not grant either the Carrier or the Adjustment Board the authority to do this. The Act provides that the rules or working conditions will not be changed until a notice is served to change said rules .or working conditions as per Section 6 of the Act reading:

 "SECTION 6. Carriers and representatives of the employees shall give at' leapt thirty days' written notice of an `intended change in agreements affecting rates of pay, rules, or working condi== tions, and the time and place for the beginning of conference between the

 representatives of the parties interested in such intended chancres shall be agreed upon within ten days niter the receipt of said notice, and said time shall be
                    LABOR MEMBERS'


      DISSENT TO AWARD NO. 6332, DOCKET NO. 6148 Page13


          .'within the thirty days provided in the

          notice. In every case where such notice

          of intended change has been given, or

          conferences are being held with reference

          thereto, or the services of the Mediation

          Board have been requested by either party,

          or.said Board has proffered its services,

          mates of pay, rules, or working conditions

. `shall not be altered by the carrier until
          the controversy has been finally acted


upon as required by Section 5 of this Act, '
 ' by the Mediation Hoard, unless a period of
                teen days has elapsed after termination of

                conferences without request for or proffer

                of the services of. the Mediation Board."


        Therefore, Award No. 6;32 is palpably erroneous.


                                  t·7O. earn


                                  D. S . Anderson


                                  E. J. Haesaert


                                  ~E. J. McDermott


    · .R. E. Stenzinger


C