Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7693
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7387
2-LI-EW-'78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert A. Franden when award was .rendered.
( System Federation No.
156,
Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Electrical Workers)
(
( The Long Island Rail Road Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That Electrician Lineman Cable Splicer John A. Caggiano was denied
his seniority rights due to management's violation of the working
agreement by not awarding Mr. Caggiano, who was the senior
qualified bidder, Position No. 7 on Advertisement No. l (E.T.)
which was posted 4:00 p.m. January 7, 1976 and closed at 8:00 a.m.
January 14, 1976.
2. That, accordingly, Mr. Caggiano should be award Position No. 7
effective 8:00 a.m. January 22, 1976.
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.
On January
7, 1976
the Carrier posted advertisements for two positions;
Position No.
6
(Lineman or Lineman Cable Splicer, Truck) and Position No. 7
(Lineman or Lineman Cable Splicer). The Claimant bid on the positions indicating that his first preference was Position No. 7.
The Carrier argues that it has been the practice on this property to
assign the junior qualified employe to an open position when no qualified
senior employe bids on the position. Because Claimant possessed the proper
drivers license he was the qualified junior employe and ,assigned to position
6
(Lineman or Lineman Cable Splicer, Truck). An employe junior to Claimant
was awarded position No. 7. Said employe did not possess the necessary
drivers license.
The Carrier argues that the actions it took were within its managerial
prerogatives and confirmed by the past practice on the property.
Form 1
Pa ge 2
Award No.
7693
Docket No. 7387
2-LI-EW-'78
We are not persuaded by the Carrier's argument. Rule 16 which sets
out the process for bulletening and awarding positions is clear and unambiguous. The senior applicant having the necessary qualifications will
be awarded the position. In the instant case with regard to position
No. 7 that would be the Claimant. 'rye find no language in the rule qualifying it so as to permit the interpretation the Carrier asks.
That the Agreement was violated.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjuztment Board
.·o-Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 25th day of October,
1978.