Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 10980
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 10715
2-SP-CM-'86
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Hyman Cohen when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States
( and Canada
Parties to Dispute:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company
(Eastern Lines)

Dispute: Claim of Employes:

1. That the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Eastern Lines) violated the controlling agreement particularly Rules 117 and 29, when they arbitrarily transferred nine (9) bad ordered cars from their Houston Car Heavy Maintenance Plant, Houston, Texas to be repaired at the GATX Plant in Hearne, Texas, June 10, 1983.

2. That accordingly, the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Eastern Lines) be ordered to divide equally eighty hours (80) at overtime rate among the following Carmen:







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.



The events giving rise to the instant Claim occurred at the Carrier's Houston Car Heavy Maintenance Plant located at Houston, Texas.
Form 1 Award No. 10980
Page 2 Docket No. 10715
2-SP-CM-'86

On June 10, 1983, a group of cars were out of service and awaiting wheel and axle assemblies at various locations, in Houston, Texas. A hospital train was prepared and the cars were dispatched to GATX Plant, Hearne, Texas for repair. With the filing of the instant Claim, the Organization contends that the Carrier violated Rules 117 and 29 of the Controlling Agreement because it failed to keep the car at its Houston facility to be worked by the Claimants who are Carmen.

Rule 117, the Classification of Work Rule, provides that Carmen's work "shall consist" of duties that are enumerated within the Rule. Rule 29 provides that "none but mechanics or apprentices regularly employed" shall perform "mechanics' work as per the special rules of each craft ***." These Rules contemplate that the Carrier, which is a party to the Agreement with the organization, has control over the work to be performed. In this case, the cars in dispute were not owned or controlled by the Carrier; rather, they were the property of the GATX Corporation. The Carrier did not have the materials needed to repair the cars. As a consequence, GATX requested the Carrier to send the cars to its home shop for repairs. Pursuant to AAR Rules, private or foreign line car owners have the prerogative, when one of their cars becomes bad ordered, to either direct the Carrier to repair the car or direct it to send the car to the home shop for repairs by the owner or a contract shop. In compliance with the AAR Rules, the cars in question were returned to GATX.

There is nothing in the record to indicate that the Organization has been granted the exclusive right to perform work on privately owned cars. To be sure the Agreement does not provide for such an exclusive right; nor has the Organization demonstrated a past practice to support its Claim. In Second Division Award No. 7584, the following was stated:




Form 1 Award No. 10980
Page 3 Docket No. 10715
2-SP-CM-'86






                          By Order of Second Division


                0000~'~


Attest:
        Nancy J 401wier - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 10th day of September 1986.