Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 10250
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9796
2-SLSW-MA-185
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee David P. Twomey when award was rendered.
( International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
Parties to Dispute:
( St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
Time claim for one hour at the pro rata rate of pay for Machinist Inspector
H. S. Settle, due to the Carrier violating the controlling Agreement
including Rules 34-1, 43 and 100. Additionally, Article III of the
September 25, 1964 Agreement due to the Carrier assigning Quality Control
Supervisor C. D. Cockrell to inspect switch engine 2489 on March 24,
1981 at Pine PZuff, Arkansas.
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.
As indicated in the handling on the property, Locomotive 2489 was inspected
by a Machinist upon arrival at the Pine Bluff Locomotive Facility. Following the
Machinist's
inspection, Quality
Control Supervisor C. D. Cockrell prepared a
quality control
inspection report,
on a Quality Control Inspection Report form,,
noting
that some 27 different repairs were needed. Employees Smith and Reberson
performed the repairs on items 8, 13 and 20 of this report while employee Cobb
performed repairs on item 18.
The Organization contends that the Carrier violated Rule 34, Assignment of.
Work, Rule 43, Classification of Work, and Article III of the September 25, 1964
Agreement. The Carrier disagrees.
We find, in the very narrow context of this record, when Locomotive 2489 was
first inspected by a Machinist upon arrival at the Pine Bluff Locomotive Facility,
that the Carrier was entitled to conduct a quality control inspection of the
Locomotive subsequent thereto. And, the Carrier certainly has the right to have
repairs made on defects which the Quality Control Supervisor finds in his inspection
of the Locomotive conducted subsequent to that performed by a Machinist. We find
on the limited record before this Board that the Organization has not shown that
the Quality Control Inspection in this case was
in
lieu of the "engine inspecting"
reserved to the Machinists' Craft in Rule 43. Therefore we shall deny this claim.
Form 1 Award No. 10250
Page 2 Docket No. 9796
2-SLSW-MA-'85
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest~9
:
Nancy J --~er - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of January 1985.