Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6696
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
6594
2-MP-CM-'74
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
'addition Referee Irving R. Shapiro when award was rendered.
( System Federation No. 2, Railway Employes'
( Department, A.F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
(
( Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated the
controlling Agreement, particularly Rule 1, Section 2(e)
when upgraded Carman P. A. Thompson, North Little Rock,
Arkansas was not permitted to complete his bulletined
assignment of truck driver on June 22, 1972 when'the truck
was called for wrecking service at Malvern, Arkansas on
that date.
2. That accordingly the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
be ordered to compensate upgraded Carman Thompson in the
amount of six
(6)
hours at the punitive rate for June
22,
1972.
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 waived right of appearance at hearing
thereon.
In the early afternoon of June
22, 1972,
the derailment of three
cars at Malvern, Arkansas, resulted in three members of the North Little
Rock wrecking crew being called upon to travel forty-five miles to the
scene of the accident and rerail the cars. The crew was instructed to
use a truck, normally used for emergency road work, to transport them
and certain equipment needed for rerailment from North Little Rock to
Malvern and return. They left North Little Rock at 2:30 PM and returned
at
9:30
PM, with one of the regularly assigned members driving the
Form 1 Award No. 6696
Page 2 Docket No. 6594
2-MP-CM-'74
vehicle.
Claimant, classified as a Carman Helper, had been upgraded to Carman
when he bid for and was assigned to fill a temporary vacancy created for
the period when the regularly assigned Carman-Truck Driver was on vacation.
The bulletined position he held on June 22, 1972 had assigned hours of
7:00 AM to 3:30 PM, Monday through Friday.
The Claim rests on the position of Petitioner that prior to the end
of Claimant's regular tour of duty on the day in question, the vehicle
used for Claimant's job assignment was furnished to the wrecking crew for
its use between 2:30 PM and 9:30 PM. Had Claimant been permitted to
fulfill his regular assigned duty of driving the vehicle involved, he would
have been with the wrecking crew until 9:30 PM and earned six hours of
overtime pay.
It is noted that Petitioner does not contend that the three employes
called out for the rerailing were not the proper ones to be drawn from
the wrecking service overtime board. Nor does it argue that more than
three crew members were necessary to accomplish the work involved. The
thrust of its position is that only Claimant was to be permitted to
drive the truck and therefore he should have been added to the crew for
such purpose.
1
Nothing in Rule 1 Section 2(e) or Rules 117 (Classification of
Work), and Rule 119 (Wrecking Crews) of the Controlling Agreement prohibit Carrier from assigning any and all necessary equipment and tools
to be used by mechanics of the appropriate categories to perform their
properly assigned tasks. It is well established that no employe "owns"
a piece of equipment belonging to Carrier and has exclusive rights to
use same. This was well stated in Third Division Award 19815 (Roadley)
in which it was held that, "Nothing in the Agreement supports the contention the Claimant, as a Laborer-Driver, had exclusive rights to drive
any particular truck or that Carrier is restricted in the use of a
Carrier=owned vehicle to its operation by any one employee alone to the
exclusion of all others."
The facts in this case are clearly distinguishable from those in
Award 6460 of this Division. There, the call out of a wrecking crew
member who was on his rest day to drive a truck to handle a derailment, instead of utilizing one of the members of the crew who was on
duty that day to perform this function, deprived the Claimant in that
case of his opportunity to be a member of the wrecking crew. That did
not, as in the instant matter, involve adding a truck driver to the
crew for the sole purpose of transporting the members thereof, and the
necessary tools to and from the derailment. That was a case of misassignment from the wrecking service board, which is not what occurred
on June 22, 1972 at North Little Rock.
Form 1
Page
3
A WAR D
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
BY --ric~J~r
a-Q.-~!./
Ros arie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of May, 1974.
Award No. 6696
Docket No.
6594
2-MP-CM-'74
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division