Form 1 NATIONAL RATLRDiLD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No,
7813
SECOM DIVISION Docket No.
7744
2-SCL-MA-'
79
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered,
( International Association of Machinists
( _ and Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company
Dispu pute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the applicable agreement the Carrier improperly
furloughed Machinist Helpers C . Bass,
8-8-75;
F. T. TncDonald,
8-8-75;
G. L. Dockery,
8-8-75;
F. LeGrand, Jr.,
7-3-75;
J. A.
Nicholas,
2-16-75;
B. D. Watts,
1-2-75
and R. F. McRae, Jr.,
12-2T+-7T+
on the dates opposite their name and turned their work
over to rlachi nists in violation of :, l.e
53
of the curt ent
agreement.
2, That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to re-employ these
furloughed helpers to the extent and degree necessary to
perform work provided for helpers in Rule
53
of the current
agxeement.
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 iraived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The organization contends that carrier violated Agreement Rule
53
when it furloughed seven
(7)
Machinist Helpers and assigned their work to
Machinists.
Carrier argues that Rule
53
does poi; require the assigrnnent of
Machinist Helpers, but r:erely lists the work r:el.r ' )ers Tnauld perform if
Carrier determined that they ;ere needed to assist 1~.iachini sts.
Our xevie~r of tire record and the detailed body of Second. Division
decisional laz~r on this question clearly
indicates
that in tire absence of
a specific contract restriction, there is no violation when mechanics
Form l Award No.
7813
Page ?_ Docket No.
7744
2-SCL-NIA-'79
perform work previously perfotmned by helpers. We do not find any such
restrictive .provision herein. The :"achinist, as master of his trade, may
perform any duties of his craft. (See fox example, Second Division Award
73 42 ) .
Accordingly, since we do not have any agreement justification for
varying the auplication of this well developed institutionalized judicial
principle here, we will, of necessity, deny the claim.
A
?v
A R D
Claim denied.
. NArL'TGT.I-1L RPILROPD ADJUSTHS
IFT
BOARD
33y Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
4:=°.°.
...hue
a.._
' ~.~. ___ : .
~-..ase:iaxie' i3rasch - i:cvnins_svxativet'1ssj.stani,
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 10th day of January,
1.979·