Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 10051
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9367-T
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee George S. Roukis when award was rendered.
( Sheet Metal Workers' International Association
( Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. On December 9, 1979, second shift engine house Foreman Bishop instructed
Hostlers Womack and Vonsegren to disconnect 4 air (pipe) hoses and
close 8 valves on train #140 at Moncrief Shop, Jacksonville, Florida.
2. The disconnecting air (pipe) hoses by Hostlers violated Rules 26(a),
84 & 85 of Current Working Agreement, also letter of Understanding
dated December 20, 1967.
3. That Sheet Metal Worker M. M. Moody be paid four (4) hours at time
and one-half rate of pay.
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 employes 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 Organization contends that Carrier violated the Controlling Agreement,,
particularly Rules 85 and 26(a) when 2 Hostlers were used to disconnect 4 air
hoses and close 8 valves on Train #140 at Moncrief Shop, Jacksonville, Florida.
The asserted violation occurred on December 9, 1979. It argues that the work
of connecting and disconnecting hoses on diesel locomotives has traditionally
been performed by Sheet Metal Workers at the Moncrief situs and avers that
Carrier also violated the August 10, 1975 understanding that recognized the
propriety of craft work at the Moncrief Shop. It maintains that on or about
August 10, 1975 when Carrier decided to move Sheet Metal Workers, Machinists
and Electricians from Moncrief to West Jacksonville, it was understood that
employes of the respective crafts would be sent to Moncrief to perform work
customarily performed by that craft at that location. More pointedly, it argues
that Carrier paid similar type claims in the past when employes other than
Sheet Metal Workers connected or disconnected air hoses.
Form 1 Award No. 10051
Page 2 Docket No. 9367-T
2-SCL-SM-184
Carrier contends that the work of disconnecting air hoses and closing
valves does not accrue exclusively to any one craft. It asserts that the
agreements of other crafts including the United Transportation Union (UTU)
contain provisions permitting employes of that craft to couple and uncouple air
hoses between diesel units and argues that the work was incidental to the
Hostler's work. It avers that Moncrief Yard has not been a locomotive repair
facility since 1975 when the repair facility, the assigned Sheet Metal Workers
and the other crafts were transferred to the West Jacksonville Shop and thus
the primary work of repairing locomotives was moved elsewhere. It recognized
that other claims were paid at Moncrief following the move to West Jacksonville
but argues that the work was performed incidental to repair work needed at that
time. It asserts that the work performed by the Hostlers on December 9, 1979
was not related or incidental to repairs, but instead was incidental to the
fueling, watering and sanding of the five units of Train ##140 which was Hostler,s
work.
The United Transportation Union (UTU) as an interested third party submitted
a response to the National Railroad Adjustment Board wherein it acknowledged
that Article 48(f) 2(2) and (3l of the UTU Agreement does not extend exclusivity
to Hostlers and Hostler Helpers to couple and uncouple air hoses on locomotives.
It did note that the work has been performed at Jacksonville by the Sheet Metal
Workers, but recognized that employes working under the UTU-E Agreement may be
required to perform this type of work without additional compensation under the
specific circumstances poutlined" at Jacksonville.
In our review of this case, we concur with Carriers position. While the
organization has argued that Carrier has paid similar claims in the past, we
believe such claims were paid for work that was performed incidental to the
emergency repair and
maintenance of
diesel units at Moncrief. Moreover, the
record indicates that the Organization did not always progress claims of a
similar nature. Since Moncrief was no longer a repair facility and Sheet Metal
Workers were moved to West Jacksonville with the explicit understanding that
work previously performed at Moncrief would be assigned to Sheet Metal Workers
when such work was required, it is not unreasonable to assume that the parties
contemplated the traditional repair work originally performed at Moncrief.
Otherwise, it would be meaningless and counterproductive to transfer Sheet
Metal Workers to Jacksonville. The disputed work in this instance is neither
exclusive to the petitioning craft nor incidental under the circumstances of
its performance herein to repair work. For these reasons we will deny the
claim.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: _.
Nancy ver - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of August 1984.