Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9271
SECOND DIVISION Docket No.
9362-T
2-KCS-L&A-EST-' 82
The Second Division consisted of the regular members end in
addition Referee John B. LaRocca when award ass rendered.
( International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( Kansas City Southern Railway Company
( Louisiana and Arkansas
Railway Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Kansas City Southern Railway Company violated Rules 28 (a) (1),
29 (a), 61, and 62 (a) of the April 1,
1980
controlling agreement when
they assigned Machinist Bowman and Machinist Apprentice Wright to perform
electricians' work on Monday, august 11,
1980,
thus, depriving Electrician
J. Baron and Electrician G. King of their contractual rights under the
provisions of the Agreement at Shreveport, Louisiana.
2. That, accordingly, Carrier be ordered to compensate Electrician J. Barton
and Electrician G. King two hours and forty minutes (2'40") each at the
overtime rate for Monday, August 11,
1980.
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 Carrier assigned a Machinist and a Machinist Apprentice to disconnect the
electrical leads (which run from the main generator to the traction motor) as part
of the Machinists' overall assignment of changing the truck of Engine
loo.
622 at
the Carrier's Shreveport Diesel Shop. Disconnecting the leads consumed less than
one-half hour of time and the total truck change assignment took approximately two
hours on August 11,
1980.
Claimants are two Electricians stationed at the Shreveport
Diesel Facility and they each seek two hours and forty minutes of pay at the overtime
rate arising out of the Carrier's alleged misassignment of work reserved exclusively
to the electrical craft pursuant to Rule 62(a) of the applicable agreement.
The Organization argues that the disconnection of electrical leads is reserved
exclusivtl~y to Electricians by both Rule 62(a) and historical practice. In addition
the Organization asserts the disputed work was not governed by the incidental work
rule (Addendum No. 10 of the applicable agreement) not only because Engine No. 622
was in the shop for major repairs but also because the Shreveport Diesel Shop is
not a running repair facility. The Carrier contends it has brought forward
sufficient proof that Shreveport is both a heavy repair and running repair shop.
Therefore, the Carrier claims it could assign Machinists to disconnect the leads
incidental to their primary assignment of changing the truck. The Machinists'
Organization did not take a position in this dispute.
Form 1
Page 2
Award No. 9271
Docket No. 9362-T
2-KCS-L&A-EX-' 82
In two previous decisions, this Board has ruled that the disconnection of
electrical leads could be classified as incidental work provided the work is
performed as part of a running repair at a running repair location (assuming the
other elements of the incidental work rule have been satisfied). See Second
Division Awards No. 7610 and No.
8316.
The Carrier has presented sufficient evidence
that its Shreveport Diesel Shop is utilized for running repairs as well as major
repairs. Since the disputed work in this case was a minor task incidental to the
main assignment of changing the truck at a running repair facility, we must deny the
claim.
AW AR D
Claim denied.
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By
osemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
D ed at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of
July,
19820
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of
Second Division