Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8619
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8244
2-N&W-CM-'81
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee George E. Larney when award was rendered.
( Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
Parties to Dispute: ( and Canada




Dispute: Claim of Employes:





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.



In the instant claim the Organization alleges Carrier failed to timely issue and apply revised car count figures for Bison Yard, a coordinated facility maintained by Carrier in conjunction with the Consolidated Rail Corporation, for the period ending September 30, 1977. The Organization asserts that percentage figures derived from the car count and applied to determine the number of Carmen positions allocated to ConRail and the Carrier were due to be issued on date of December 1, 1977. Instead, these figures were issued on date of April 26, 1978 and were not applied until May 25, 1978. As a result, the Organization claims, at least four (4) and possibly seven (7) additional Carmen positions should have been allocated to them in Bison Yard beginning December 1, 1977. Had the Carrier, asserts the Organization, not been delinquent in its contractual obligation to apply the figures in a timely manner, the appropriate number of Carmen positions would have been posted for bid and the two (2) Claimant Carmen would have been recalled from furlough on December 1, 1977 rather than on April 19, 1978 and June 12, 1978, respectively.
Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 8619
Docket No. 8244
2-N&W-CM-'81

The Board notes the Organization has relied on Article 1(a) of the Memorandum of Agreement dated October 5, 1965 in progressing the instant claim. We note further that a number of claims, somewhat different in nature than the instant one, have recently been brought before us by the very same parties on this very, same property. In the following Second Division Awards, Numbers 8286, 8287, 8288, and 8410, we took the position that disputes arising under the October 5, 1965 Memorandum Agreement are subject to adjudication under Section 13, the arbitration clause contained in the Washington Agreement of May 21, 1936. We reaffirm this position in the case at bar noting again that where the parties have contractually provided for disposition and resolution of claims in a forum which relieves them from the requirements of the Railway Labor Act by virtue of Section 5 (11) of the Interstate Commerce Act, we will recognize and respect such arrangement. Therefore, we dismiss the instant claim for lack of proper jurisdiction.

A W A R D

Claim dismissed.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADa'USTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


By 'aee~
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 11th day of February, 1981.