Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 71i+7
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7026-T
2-N&W-SM-'76
The Second Division consist_=z
of
tile regular members and in
addition Referee Nicholas T. ~'_at~::~_. wizen award was rendered.
( S::~eet Pv:~., tal. Viorkers ° International
( Association
Parties to Dispute:
(
( llorfqlk atd W:atern Railway Company
Dispute: Clam of EmployoDs:
1. That under the current Agreement, other than employer of the
Sheet Metal Woraers' Craft (Carmen), were improperly assigned
to perform pipe work consisting of cutting, fitting and installing
guard rail hand rail constructed from one and tine half
(12)
inch
pipe and three quarter
(3/4)
inch pipe in the Scrub Room, Roanoke
Shops, Roanoke, Virginia on May
7, 197+.
2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to additionally compensate
sheet metal woraers J. E. Minnix and C. L. Minnix, Jr., in the
amount of one hundred (100) hours at the time and one half rate,
to be equally divided among them for this work.
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 employer involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21,
193+.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispzte were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Organization asserts that Carmen were improperly assigned t4 perform
pipe work that consisted of cutting, fitting and installing a handrail in
Carrier's Roanoke Shops on the claim date in question:
Carrier contends that the claim must be rejected because the work of
installing handrails does not belong exclusively to this Organization.
Carrier cited other instances in the past where other crafts had performed
identical work. Carrier flzrther contends that this Board in previous
awards has held that identical work to that .complained of herein does not
come within the Organization's Classification of Work Rule.
Form 1 Award No.
71+7
Page 2 Docket No. 7026-T
2-N&W-SM-'76
In Second Division Award Pfo. 6t:41) °_r>~,=avin7 the same parties and a
virtually identical statement of Caa.ii:~ i,~:~s ~~ ivi;.,i~.:r? denied the claim
stating:
"The Carrier assigned the vor_L o~' l:i.::~oallz.ng a 1 1/2-inch
handrail on the roof of a cinder bl<..;~-=: building to employer of
the Maintenance of Way Department Ths was done in connection
with convertftng Carrier's diesel. ma,i-atptlianc.e facilities at
Roanoke Shops to an assemb_,T-1~_nE~
ty-pe
of p;^Oducaion.
The Employer contend that t:~e wcx°': ixrrolved is exclusively
theirs under Rule No. 81- of the effect ._ve Agreement. Rule No.
84
reads
' Sheet metal workers' work shall consist; of
tinning, coppexsmi,th:'_tig and pipefitting in shops,
yards, buildings, on passenger coaches and engines
of all kinds; the bu'~lding, dismantling (for repairs
only) and maintaining parts made of sheet copper,
brass, tin, zinc, white metal, lead, black, planished,
pickled, and glavanized iron of 10 gauge and lighter
. (present practice between sheet metal. workers and
boilermakers to continue relative to gauge of iron),
including brazing, soldering, tinning, leading and
babbitting (except car and tender truck journal bearings),
the bending, fitting,, cutting, threading (when men are
regularly assigned to operate pipecutting and threading
machines), brazing, connecting and disconnecting of air,
water, gas, oil and steam pipes, the operation of
babbitt fires (in co;:inection with sheet metal workers'
work), oxyacetylene, thermit and electric welding, and
all other work generally recogrli,zed as sheet metal
workers' work,'
Second Division National Railroad Adjustment Board Award
5951
(2umas) involved the same parties and Rule.
Award
5951
States:
. 'Rule
84,
relied on by the Organization, is vague and
unclear. There is no classification under the rule which
covers the work complained of.
The record does disclose, however, that in the past
this kind of work had been performed by Maintenance of
Way employer. There is no necessity to cite authority for
the long standing tenet of this Board that absent a
clear and unambiguous rule, past practice governs.'
Form 1
Page
3
Award Pdo.
71+7
Docket No. 7026-T
2-New-sM-176
"'In the claim before the Board the employes have failed
to show their right to the: ~e~°~°h. 1>y ;cast practice. We agree
with the Referee in Award 5-1051 whey, h,:~ stated that Rule No.
84 ' is
vague and unclear."'
Award
No.
6040
is sound, a:id the Organization has shown no reason to
deviate from its findings.
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
A
w
A R Ii
NATIONAL
RA'rEROAD
ADJUSTMENT
BOARD
By Order of Second Division
By ~ ~i~1~d
osemarie Brash - AcI.ministrative Assistant
Date at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of October,
1976.