Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 10734
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 10502
2-MP-CM-'86
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Lamont E. Stallworth when award was rendered.
( Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
( and Canada
Parties to Dispute:
( Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated rules 25 (a)
and 102, October 14, 1982, when Mr. P. Crimm, Assistant Trainmaster,
performed the necessary ground work in rerailing freight car MP
651219 in Great Southwest Industrial Area within the yard limits
of Fort Worth, Texas.
2. That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company be ordered to compensate
Carman G. T. Baxter in the amount of a call (four (4) hours straight
time) account of this violation.
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 instant dispute evolves around a factual evidentiary issue: Whether
the Assistant Trainmaster did the disputed work.
On October 9, 1982, the parties are in agreement that a single freight car
derailed at a train yard in Fort Worth. Two Carmen sent to rerail the car on
October 10 decided the assistance of a locomotive was required. On October 14
another crew succeeded in rerailing the car.
The Carrier's position is that the crew worked 8 hours and that the
Assistant Trainmaster present only supervised the operation.
The Organization did not argue that the yard crew should not perform the
work, but that the Trainmaster present must have performed some of the
disputed work.
Form 1 Award No. 10734
Page 2 Docket No. 10502
2-MP-CM-'86
The Organization's claim of exclusivity of Carmen's work relies on Rule 25
(a), Rule 102 and Rule 105 which provide, in pertinent part:
"Rule 102. Carmen Classification of Work
"Carmen's work, including regular and helper apprentices,
shall consist of building, maintaining, painting, upholstering and inspecting of all passenger and freight
cars, both wood and steel."
"Rule 105.
"When wrecking crews are called for wrecks or derailments
outside of yard limits, a sufficient number of the regularly
assigned crew will accompany the outfit. For wrecks or
derailments within yard limits, a sufficient number of
carmen and helpers on duty will be used to perform the work."
"Rule 25. Assignment of Work
"(a) None but mechanics or apprentices regularly employed
as such shall do mechanics' work as per the special rules
of each craft."
There are many prior Awards (see 10415, 6455, 10091 and 10258) wherein the
Board held that an Organization must show by strong and conclusive evidence
that it is entitled to the work by specific rule language or, that the work
traditionally and exclusively belongs to Carmen on a system-wide basis by past
practice.
The Board has thoroughly reviewed the evidence in this case and it finds
that the burden of proof rests entirely upon the Organization. There is no
proof in the record that the Assistant Trainmaster did anything more than
supervise.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
&OOC4
Attest:
Nancy ever - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 19th day of February 1986.