Form 1 NATIONAL RAIIROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No.
8985
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
8263-T
2-SCL-EW-'82
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Ilerbert L. Marx, Jr., when award was rendered.
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute
( Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of oyes:
1. That in the Waycross, Georgia Shops on October 31, 1977, November 1,
1977, November 2, 1977, November
3,
1977, November 4, 1977 and
November 7, 1977 the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company violated the
controlling Agreement when Laborer George D7-yden was assigned to
operate overhead traveling crane instead of calling and/or notifying
Overhead Traveling Crane Operator J. T. Taylor who was available for
work on October 31, 1977, R. D. Murray who was available for work on
November 1, 1977, J. A. Peacock who was available for work on
November 2, 1977, L. Herrin who way: ;.nvailab le for work on November
3,
1977, M. King who was available for work on November 4, 1977 and J. T.
Taylor who was available for work on November 7, 1977.
2. That Overhead Traveling Crane Operator J. T. Taylor be compensated
seventeen (17) hours at the punitive rate of pay and Overhead
Traveling Crane Operators R. D. Murray, J. A. Peacock L. Herrin
and M. King be compensated for eight and one-hall
(8'k~
hours each
at the punitive rate of pay by reason of Laborer G. Dryden's assignment
to perform Overhead Traveling Crane Operator's work in violation of
Rules 15, 95(a), (b) & (c) and Appendix "Q" on October
31,
1977,
November 1, 1977, November 2, 1977, November
3,
1977, November
1977 and November 7, 1977.
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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Fireman and Oilers organization was notified of this dispute and elected
not to enter an appearance.
This dispute centers on work performed on the overhead traveling crane on
six days on the second shift, at a time when the regularly assigned Electric
Traveling Crane Operator was absent owing to illness. Other regularly assigned
Crane Operators were scheduled on the first shift.
on;, 1. Award No.
8985
Page '= Docket No. 8263-T
2-SCL-EW-'82
:Rule
95
is applicable and reads as follows:
"Rule 95 - ELECIC . TRAVELING CRANE OPERATORS
(a) Electric traveling crane operators will be assigned to
operate overhead traveling cranes having a capacity less
than forty (40) tons. This not to include such cranes
operated from the floor.
(b) Electric traveling crane operators, capacity of forty
(Z!-0) tons and over, shall be paid the rate as shown in Rule
49 of this agreement.
(c) When necessary to fill electric crane operator positions,
electrician helpers will be used if there are no electric
crane operators available."
According to the record, Electrician Helpers were asked to perform the work:
on the six days but declined to accept the assignment. The Carrier thereupon
utilized a Laborer from another craft to perform the crane operating work.
(That this employe subsequently established seniority as an Electrician Helper
has no relevance here to the dates at issue.)
The Carrier argues that Rule
95
gave it the right to use an Electrician
Helper in the second-shift vacancy. When such Electrician Helpers did not accept
the work, the Carrier claims it may fill the position with another employe,
having fulfilled its obligation under Rule
95.
The Organization argues that
Crane Operators, assigned to the first shift, were readily "available" and thus
should have been assigned the second-shift work on an overtime basis. The
Organization thus goes so far as to argue that not only is the use of a
LeAmorer from another craft improper but that even the use of an Electrician
Helper would be improper since, by the Organization's definition, the firstshift Crane Operators were "available".
In,
this dispute, the Board need not review the relative rights of firstshift Crane Operators vs. second-shift Electrician Helpers. (This point, however,
is dealt with in Award Tdo.
8558
(Roukis), involving the same parties and the
same rule.) The question for resolution here is whether, under Rule
95,
an
employe from another craft may be utilized.
Rule
95
(a) is clear and-unambiguous and put in mandatory terms: "Electric
Traveling Crane Operators will be assigned to operate overhead traveling cranes
having a capacity less than forty (40) tons." (Emphasis added). The rule
contains an exception -- in paragraph (c) -- concerning the use of Electrician
Helpers. Whatever the extent of such exception, it assuredly does not include
any other classification than Electrician Helper. Thus, for any other category
of employe, the rule reverts to Paragraph (a) which mandates the assignment
of Crane Operators to the work.
The organization cites a previous Carrier decision involving 14 similar
instances. Although this decision was not made at the highest Carrier level,
Form 1
Page
3
it is nevertheless supportive of the view taken here by th<! Board.
The Carrier refers to previous use of Laborers to operate the crane,
without documenting such instances. Such practice, even if demonstrated, cannot
withstand the specific language of Rule
95.
Thus, the Board finds that the Claimants were denied work to which they
should have been assigned. The Board will, however, deny a claim for pay at
the punitive rate, in line with many other second Division awards and in view
of the fact that the Claimants were not called upon to perform the work.
Award No.
8985
Docket No.
8263-T
2 -SCI.-EW-
'82
A W A R D
Claim sustained to the extent of,pptyment at straight-time rate.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Seccmd Division
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
v
emarie Brasch - Admin strative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of March,
1982.