Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUST2~IEId'I' BOARD Award No. 7963
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7846-T
2-BNI-SM-' 79








Dis-













F3.ndin~:~

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whale record and all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier or carriers and the ernploye or employer involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and anploye .,zithin the meaning of the Railway Labor Ant as approved June ?_l, 19311.

Th_1s Division of the Adjustment Bcard has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.




opportunity to perform work at their trade, contractually reserved and
guaranteed them, when, on dates of April 8, 9, and 11, 1977 respectively,
Carrier assigned employees of the Machinists' Craft to perform work o11 a
bur nishirf; lathe machine located in the neir automated v:Theel Shop at Havelock,
Nebraska. As a result, C1 a~iraatxts request they each be compensated for twenty
eight (28) hours pay at the rate of tune and one-half (1 f) the prevailing
rate paid on the afar e:nentioned dates.

The instant dispute arose as a result of Carrier needing to have corrective work done an a burnishing lathe so as to make the machine operabl^. Carrier acquired the lathe from another of its shuns located at St. Paul, Minnesota and shipped the mr.ch-i.ne to the Havelock vAleel Shop located at
Form 1 Page 2

Award No, 7963
Docket No. 781+6-T
2-BNT-SM-'79

Havelock, Nebraska,, omen received at Have7_ock, it was determined the lathe was in inoperable condition requiring comm_fete rebuilding of its hydraulic control system. Carrier arranged to have this work performed by an outside contractor who completely redesigned and -modernized the machine. Specifically, the work in4rolved the desi n anal renewal. of the hydr aul a c control panels, COriSlStin" of xnani fo1.d, valves and piping. When the control panels were received from the outside contractor, Carrier discovered they could not be mounted to the original pump and reservoir of the lathe because the manifold in each panel was turned ninety (g0) degrees from what 9.t should have beer... Corrective measures vTe.-_ necessary to make the lathe operable and inasmuch.. as the Carrier was not px·ez:ared to endure z`ur'the? delays in the machine's operation, Carrier decv.ded to use their own employees to p°rfoxTn -the required work under the direction of the outside contractor. Carrier ass!Ened employees of the I:=aeh:inist Craft to perfox2:^. t,he aforerientioned wor1r, which consistedof remov:i.nthe manifolds from e.aoh control pe-.nel, blocking or p3a? gin<g the existing holes and dr:ii7.ling and twppi ng ncT~r ones on the. o7,)osite -.:Ld e of the


manifolds. In order to a:cco=pliStl these (,c_._.__S :~ '~,N necessary t0 disconnect
and reconnect steel h5=o?.ravli c lines runninS to -the manifolds and valves.

The Organization Lakes the position that the tasks involved in d:isconnecting and reconnecting the steel h;ra~aul.ic lines xwnning to the. manifolds and valves constituted a preponderance of the i,-ork involved in madi:E`y-in; 'she lathe and that these tasks are contract.ufj.1!y :reserved for the Sheet Ivietal Craft under the Classification of Work IWle 71 of the Controlling Collective Bargain--l_rg tyrce::~ent effective April 1, 1970. The Organization supports ''its basic position by noting that in order to correct the control system panels more than one hundred (100) oil pipes were disconnected, cut;, bent, fit and reconnected and more than f:we hundred (500) pipe fitt:in~s wero disconnected, fit and reconnected. The Organization argues there are no exceptions to Rule 71 which would pex·rait other crafts to perform pipefittirg work to oil pipes.

The Carrier takes the position that the tasks of di sconnec'tir_c, and reconnecting the hydraulic lines wire incidental to the main task of correcting the design error in the control panel's manifolds. Carrier does not agree with the Organization's position that work performed on the hydraulic lines associated with correcting the lathe, was contractually reserved to the Sheet i.ietal Craft, as Rule 71 covering 'the Classification oz" Work does not, the Carrier contends, include machines of the type such as the burnishin; lathe hone in question. Carrier interprets i,'ule 71 to mean that sheet metal workers z,ril:I. be used to reneTr and repair hydraulic lines in the shop, when these lines are mounted on walls, ceilings or floors, but when the lines reach or are integral parts of machines, then machinists will be used. More precisely, Carrier adopts the view that while TRU1e 71 r:a.~kes references to pipes, the rule does not grant the exclusive right to sheet metal workers to work on pipes wlxich are part of a machine. Notwithstanding its position on the substantive issue here before the Board, it is the position of the Carrier that the Board lacks jurisdiction over the instant claim because of the Organization's failure to utilize available procedures on the property
Form l Page 3

Award No . 796
Docket No, 78+6-T
2-BNI-sM-' 79

to first settle the underlying craft jurisdiction controversy with the Machinists' Organization.

The Tnternat:~.olial Association of i:'achini.sts and Aerospace Workers ~·,ecc given notice ox' th:i s dispai;e pu_:csuant to Section 3 first (j ) of the Rail,-;sy Labor Act, and did file a response,

      Although tills Board is certain that the ta,<<?w,<.; associated irith correcting

the burnishing :i.a:t;l1o of disco?znscta.ng and leaotu:o~tinh;,edm.z~l:ic lvnes arc:
indeed tasks ~.c,~fcSTned by sileet rectal ?-;ox''-a.ers, we are not at ~,,.''13 eertwa2l 11-hat
these S~i7(:~, tasks S.1'E- CUntY°3C'i;?'.%.Ily reserved to the .5htE:Et IZeta1 Craft. Undr:'i'
RuIC 71 O.n 1 the coI?l:TOL.ing dr;z'2E:.i:?ent. ~f*.il'c:Yl the iI1S.2.':t C1;iCLL=:.-It.z?';fWGS, 8,S
the 7:'L'lC does not ^TJeca.:E'j_CaIly riention mE~G''.I:LnC:S o1 tI?e: type ,I,,Ch a:> the
b'UY'n1sZl'__1~; lathe, 'tl:.':.-'c before us :.~:Or Cons'! C.!e;r'.?.i:1U":'lC i-;tt3.E:~ 7a_ is u;i:Cl:f':i.C
however ?ihP_n it CU:'_~eS t0 p~.'.1'" 0M:i_ng such 'L:'c?.S1iS 0:1: the Sheet I:IE:'tal trade 1'iLa.~n
a 1icrbl.e to :i;s a d
ahU yards, buildings., '.',>>SeIW'8:.' CCa'W:1-,.eS and er'r*j_nFJS af V,21l_
kinds. Afi !':L7-lL' 71 v:n'a:earN t0 Ire silent ?!~;.t}7 x`eg£ix'Cl t0 Sa1.C`.. shryp machines
per , y .r n .r.~l._~. Bo-,rd ~ _a v'~ G1YTO claim ~ p :]~iu~, ..: C)_'..`
se., it .s the . o~o:ina.o,Z a_ tr _tth F~ 22,~t_ i...:~ '1...,~
the jz.7r1 sdi cti ona1_ hind as tllu~,t cont:~:pla:ted unIe~° FxLl.e J3 of the. Cont,roLlu.~;
Ag:cccn-e:lt of Aprv.l 1, 1970. As such,, thu 0?°J,qniz~,t:i.on should have proGcede?.
to resolve the cra:L't controversy first ~,r'. x,11 the Int~_-national Association
of r.., . ~_s taE..~,. } , ~ '~zuive bar-ain:Ln~s reyreseiltatisre of the erlp'!_o~;w°ens
1.~..,cllill~s~ sm::~_c;:~? aE ~.~c~ , assigned by Carz°-s e_r to Perfo>>m the ;mrh. In so rm1-.m "tha instant disp,-ite ti
o ~ Gi' -p .:y ),ckY; '~ir-·7rv-o ack u'c .!
juri sc> G~;v_or.~,1 r.,G., c . , `his .~o~ 'd a o ° ._.. .~_s its :Lof j r i . d: _c ~i o.z t;~
consider the merits of the :i.~2~ font clam :and thereby accordi21-ly dvsrn-isses
the c:Laan.

A W A R D

Claim dismissed.

PIAT1MML R1=iOAD ADJUSTihEiT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

By _
~.p;USL'Tra,I7 a .I5`'C1SCh - ACL'`ii:L Y1,7.atrc`?.'t i ve At;S1.Stant

Date at Chicago, :Cl·7..inois, this lath day of June, 1979·