Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
8413
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
8258
2-P&BR-CM-'
80
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John B. LaRocco when award was rendered,
( System Federation No,
4,
Railway Employes,
( Department, A. F. of Z. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
( Patapsco and Back Rivers Railroad Carnpany
Dispute: Claim of Employes: ,
1. That under the current agreement on the Patapsco and Back Rivers
Railroad, Sparrows Point, Maryland, the Carrier arbitrarily and in
direct contrast with the rules of the Agreement, allowed other than
Carmen to perform carmens work on the date of April
17, 1978,
2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to compensate Claimants,
M'urrill Long
#680,
and Donald Mentzer.,
#681,
for eight
(8)
hours pay
at the time and one-half rate, account of this violation.
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 Jku2e 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.
The dispute in this case concerns the employees' contention that between
10:15 a.m, - 10:30 a,m,, and between 5:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m, on April
17, 1978,
Car Foreman Horney was observed stenciling cars on track B&0
6,
Grays Station.
The record does substantiate that the car foreman was stenciling cars. The
carrier contends however that the car foreman, "could have been instructing cartnen
in the proper placement and method of stenciling cars". The employees have
contended that the foreman was working alone,
It is unfortunate that neither party supported its contention of this matter
on the property. The carrier never advanced beyond its conditioned supposition
of what activity the foreman might have been engaged in at the times of the
asserted violations, The employees did assert on the property they had support
for their position, Ma seeking a conference of this claim, the employees
asserted that: "... we are prepared to submit signed statements ..." supporting
their position that at the times involved Foreman Horney was working alone.
However, the employees in their rebuttal assert that such statements were deemed
Form 1
Page 2
Award No. 8413
Docket No. 82;,$
2-P&BR-CM-' 80
"inadmissible and unacceptable" by the carrier
which
contended that no evidence
was submitted that the foreman was working alone. On this record, this Board
cannot determine if this support for the employees' position was made a part of
the handling on the property despite the strong inference that the statements
were a part of the parties' discussion in conference. This, and other evidence
and contentions that have been initially raised before this Board have been
excluded in our review.
We conclude the agreement was violated but that claimants are only entitled,
under the contract, to one hours' pay at the straight time rate.
A W A R D
The claims are partiaJIYsustained to the extent consistent with our
findings.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONU RATLROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Divisicn
By d.-C~'~.-a.n.
s rie Brasch -Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of
July,
1980.