(Advance copy. The usual printed copies will be sent later.)
Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6508
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6319
2 LI-MA-'73
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Irving R. Shapiro when award was rendered.
( System Federation No. 156, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Machinists)
(
( Long Island Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Carrier violated the existing controlling agreement of
January 15, 1971, when it failed to pay the double time rate for
work performed on Sunday, January
24, 1971,
from 6:00 P.M. till
12:00
Midnight.
2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to additionally compensate
Machinist J. W. Birner (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) in
the amount of six (6) hours at the rate of $2.43875 per hour, the
difference between the time and one half rate and the double time
rate, a total of $14.63 and other employees of like classification
subject to all terms of the parties' contract performing work coming
within the scope of said contract in accordance with the applicable
controlling agreement.
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.
Basically this dispute involves the interpretation and application of
Article VII of the Agreement between the parties entered into on January 15,
1971. A similar dispute between the same Carrier and another Organization
(International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) which is a signatory to the
same agreement, was the subject of an Award by a Special Adjustment Board,
designated by the National Mediation Board as Public Law Board 790. That
Board
upheld the position of the Petitioner in the matter before it and sustained the
claim.
Form 1 Award No. 6506
Page 2 Docket No. 6319
C
J
2-LI-MA-'73
I
In Award 6507
rendered this day, this Board determined
that it should not reach a conclusion differing from that of Public Law Board
790. The reasons set forth in our Award 650')' are equally applicable to this case.
The Carrier raised two issues which we must consider. In addition to
the named claimant, the Petitioner seeks additional compensation for "other employes
of like classification subject to all terms of the parties' contract performing
work coming within the scope of said contract in accordance with the applicable
controlling agreement". The Carrier rightfully avers, and the record so reflects
that this was not part of the
claim
processed on the property. In Awards too
numerous to cite, this Board has, on well settled grounds, refused to entertain
facets of a claim which had not been
dealt with
in
accordance with
contractual
procedure. However, we cannot hold that the expansion of the relief and remedy
sought by the Petitioner for the breach alleged fn the first part of its claim was
fatal to the claim duly processed in behalf of the specific complainant. That
part of the claim
quoted
hereinabove will therefore be denied.
In the last paragraph of its rebuttal, the Carrier interposes entirely
new matter, not previously raised in the processing of the claim. This is not .
properly before us and will not be entertained for purposes of determining the
dispute before us.
A W A R D
C
Claim 1 sustained.
Claim 2 sustained to the extent set forth in the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest:
ez.~..·~
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of May, 1973.
,00