Form 1 -NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award
iso. 7462
SECOND DIVISION Docket :do.
733
5
2-r,IP-C M -' 78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert A. Franden 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 Rules 25 and 13, when they permitted a set
up apprentice from Sedalia, Missouri to come to Monroe, Louisisana
on June 23,
1975,
to fill a temporary vacancy which in reality
did not exist.
2. That accordingly, the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company be ordered
to compensate Cayman R. J. Wills in the amount of eight hours
(8' )
at punitive rate covering period June 23, 24, 25,
26, 27
and 30,
1975.
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,
193+.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Caiman M. C. Jordan intended to take-vacation during the month of June
and retire at the end of the month. Upgraded caiman apprentice R. E.
Deuschle who had been furloughed at Sedalia, Missouri was assigned to report
to Monroe to fill Caiman Jordan's vacation vacancy.
Jordan. elected to work through the month of June rather than take
vacation. This meant that when Deuschl.e arrived at Monroe to report for
work on June
21
there was no temporary vacancy fox him to work. Rather than.
send Deuschle back to Sedalia for one week until Jordan retired at the
end of Jane, the Carrier worked both Jordan and Deuschle on the claim dates.
The claimant alleges that the carrier violated the agreement, in that
the job performed by Deuschle was a new job which should have been, bulletined
and the vacancy filled by proper procedure.
Form 1 Award No.
7462
Page
2
Docket No.
7335
2-HP-CM-78
The Organization is technically correct in its argument that the
carrier created and unilaterally filled a position. We understand the need
of the oxganizatiori to be vigilant in its policing of its Agreement. In
the instant case, however, we find that the actions of the carrier, though
not in strict accordance with the Agreement, were done with the best of
intentions and with the welfare of their employe in mind. We further find
that no damage occxued to claimant by carrier's action in this case. The
wrong in this case is technical. We will find that a violation of the
agreement existed, but that under the circumstances, an award for damages
will not be.
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD A-DJUST14ENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
low
By
semarie Bxasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 10th day of February,
1978.