F am 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 81"
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8288
2-B&O-CM-'80
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee M. D. Lyden when award was rendered.
( Brotherhood of Railway Carmen of_the United
( States and Canada
Parties to Dispute
~ Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
_1. That under the controlling Agreement, the provisions were violated on
the date of February 10, 1978, when the Carrier utilized the services
of the Hulcher Emergency Service, an outside contractor, and ten (10)
of their ground crew members to perform rerailing service at Little
Tunnel Cut, West Virginia.
_2. That accordingly, the Carrier be ordered to compensate the assigned
crew on the Cumberland wreck outfit, being carmen Claimants L. B.
Mathias, A. T. Rice, Jr,, R. G. Hovatter, G. R. Shafferman, J. E.
Burman and A. F. Hinkle for sixteen
(16)
hours', 15 minutes' pay each
at time and one-half rate and four (4) hours' pay each at double time
rate; P. H. Sibley, W. C. Shaffer, L. D. Saville and R. H. Schriver for.
twelve (12) hours', 15-minutes' pay each at time and one-half rate:
H. E. Fraley and W. D. Rawnsley for eight (8) hours' pay each at
double time rate, and E. F. Ellis for twelve (12) hours' pay at time
and one-half rate and 15-minutes' pay at double time rate, account of
violation of Article VII of the December 4, 1975 Agreement, wherein
the Cumberland assigned wreck crew
~~x:~
available and reasonably accessible
to this derailment and not called; 'Iaus placing the Carrier in violation
of Article VII of the Wrecking Service Rule dated December 4, 1975 on
February 10 and 11, 1978.
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.
The situation described in this case revolves around the desire on the part
of the*Cumberland Wreck crew to perform meaningful work, being critical of the
carrier for utilizing outside contractor services in lieu of their own employees.
Although a strong case could be made that the Carrier should utilize its own
Form 1
Page 2
Award No.
8W
Docket No.
8288
2 -B&0-CM-'
80
employees prior to outside contractual parties, the question of contract
interpretation still remains and the contract in this case is defined as stated
below.
Article VII sets down several conditions for the use of a Carrier's wreck
crew when the carrier uses a contractor's equipment: 1) "a sufficient number of
the Carrier's assigned wrecking crew, if reasonably accessible to the wreck will
be called ... to work with the contractor"; 2) "The Carrier's wrecking equipment
and its operators"; and
3)
"The contractor's ground forces will not be used,
however, unless all available and reasonably accessible members of the assigned
wrecking crew are called". ,_
According to Article VII and Rule
96,
the Carrier did comply with the contract.
when it called the Brunswick Wrecking Crew "fhe assigned wrecking crew, if
reasonably accessible to the wreck". It is interpreted that the assigned wrecking
crew means a crew in the singular arid not-,in the plural, Le., and not to all
wrecking crews at all locations on Carrier's property where wrecking crews have been
established and/or designated. This construction is borne out by the language of
the,NOTE to Article VII which also refers to wrecking crew in the singular.
Understanding the accessibility of the Cumberland Wreck Crew and their
argument, the carrier did comply when it chose Brunswick Wrecking Crew.
Therefore, based on the testimony, documentation and in the case as a whole,
the claim of the employees must be denied.
A W A R D
Claim of Employees is denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
NATIONAL RAILRGAD, ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
By
semarie Brasch - Adm istrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 1st day of October,
1980.