FoM 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award
No.7837
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
77526
2-MP-CM-79
The Second Division consisted of. the ,regular members and in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered.
( System Federation No, 2, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F, of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Cabmen)
(
(Missouri Pacific Railroad. Company
Dispute: Claim of Em1)loyes:
(1) That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated Article VIT,
Section l and Note to Section 1 of the Agreement of January i.2,,
1976
when the-
,T
contracted out the iror
ri
of 3. e,raili.ry two ( 21
freight cars at Drn ita, Louisiana to the Hu'' chex~ Er..ergency,
May 12, 176.
(2)
That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company be ordered
t0
c01:7pCnSU:tE
Carmen .-I. A. Arnst.rong, ii.
E. !son, I'.
A. i'iechosk:i, Iv, H. P:~c^ary'
M. T.
Lint, B. G.
Px'uitt,
Tn',
A . Hamilton, A. J . Lewis., J. D.
:~.dc:.1e~,
and J. D. Cantrell in the an:ount of twewty-six
(26)
hours at the
pro rata fate.
Finding
5'
The Second Division of the
Adjustment
Board, upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carr:iex~s and the ~?~.ploye or e- loves involved in this
dispute ale respectively carrier and eaaploye witiiin tile meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 193-.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved heroin.
Fatties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Claimants assert that Carrier violated AxTticle VII Section l and note
to Section 1 of the January 12,
176
Agreement, when it contracted out the
work of xerailin.g t~ro (2) freight tax's at Bonita, Louisiana to the Hulcher
Emergency
Service on
2-Say 12, 176,
Carrier argues that the wrecking crew was mt ,reasonably accessible
as defined in the Tote to Section 1 of Article VII, so there was no basis
for using the Hoi-th Little Rock Wrecking Crew.
Foam 1 Award IVo.
737
Page 2 Docket No.
7751+
2-hiP-CM-'
79
Our preview of this provision reveals that once Carrier calls an outside
contractor to perform wrecking service work, it is contractually obligated
to call a sufficient number of its assigned wrecking crew to work with the
contractor.
The second sentence of Article VTT, which reads, "The contxactox''s
ground forces nri.l1 not be used, however., unless 8,11 7.. available and xeascnably
accessible ^lerbex°s of the assigned Wrecking crew are called" specifically
mandates that the contractor's ground forces will not be used unless all
avaa_lable and
reasonably
accessible me:rbe,xs of the assigned wrecking crew
axe called. We do not find that Cax r:i.er complied with the letter of this
requirement. It was under. art explicit obligation to call these caxtnen -first.
It did not do so. They were reasonably accessible and
available.
Moreover, while we recognize the reasoning behind claimant's pro rata,
compensatory claim, we cann.ut a-ma,,rd this wnount, We will sustain the
claim, however, fox nine
( 9)
hours and fifty-seven ( 57
)
2I:1,nutes at the
stfa.s6ht time rate fox three
(3)
cax;nen only and remand the: decision as to
which three carmen should receive this adjustment to the: .p;~operty.
This determination reflects the total number of hours the contractor
was used to perform the needed work using; thr ee
( 3 ) men
and its round trip
travel time which was six
(6)
hours and tweraty-fo,-~.r (24)rnW sites.
A W A R D
Claim sustained to the extent expressed in the find.i_ngs.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSII,T1T.l'T BGAPD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
,k. _
,~s.
BYi
-Rosexnzrie Brasch Assistant
Dated at(Chica._;c, Illinois,, this 7th day of February.,
1979.