Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
7513
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
7141
2-SOU-CM-'78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Nicholas H. Zumas when award was rendered.
( System Federation No. 21, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
( Southern Railway Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Carrier violated the controlling Agreement when they
denied f.rloughed Carmen W. E. Eubanks, T. E. Vinyard, S. P.
Price and J. E. McAbee, Hayne Shop, Spartanburg the right to
misplace promoted Student Mechanics at Wayne Yard, Spartanburg,
S. C.
2. That accordingly, the Southern Railway Company be ordered to
compensate the aforesaid employes for eight
(8)
hours pay per
day, five days per week beginning January
27, 1975
to April
7,
1975
when they were recalled to service at Hayne Shop.
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.
As
a
result of a force reduction, Claimants were furloughed. They
held seniority at Carrier's Hayne Shops at Spartanburg, S.C. Claimants
thereafter attempted to displace promoted Student Mechanics at Hayne Yard,
a separate seniority district. Carrier refused contending that Hayne Shops
and Hayne Yard were two separate seniority districts and that Claimants'
contractual rights are confined to the seniority district in which they
are employed.
Claims were submitted alleging violation of the controlling Agreement
and demanding payment from January
27, 1975
until Claimants were allowed
to displace at Hayne Yard or until they were recalled to service at Hayne
Shop. (Claimants were recalled to service at Hayne Shop on April
7, 1975.)
Form 1 Award
No.
7513
Page 2 Docket No.
7141
2-SOU-CM-'
78
Carrier contends that Claimants hold "point" seniority, and as such
have no right to displace other employes (including promoted Student
Mechanics) at another "point".
The Organization takes the position that the
controlling Agreement
does
not restrict the right to displace in another seniority district; that it
has been the system wide practice for marry years to allow furloughed
Mechanics to go to other points and displace upgraded men; and that under
the Agreement promoted Student Mechanics do not acquire seniority as
Mechanics until they have completed their full training period.
With respect to the question of whether furloughed Mechanics can go to
another "point" to displace Student Mechanics who have not acquired seniority
as Mechanics, the Board finds that Rule
30
is ambiguous -- particularly
when it is read in connection with Rule 172.
The Organization has presented sufficient unreftated evidence of a
practice on this property that furloughed Mechanics were allowed to go
to other points and displace promoted Student Mechanics.
On the basis of the record herein, we shall sustain the claim.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
--?~7 z~'-= t.f'~
," ,Lc' '~-~'
o emarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of April, 1978.
I