NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Form 1 SECOND DIVISION Award No. 12557
Docket No. 12375-T
93-2-91-2-168
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John C. Fletcher when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood Railway Carmen/Division TCU
PARTIES-TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Chesapeake
(and Ohio Railroad Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"1. That the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Company
(CSX Transportation, Inc.) (hereinafter
'carrier') violated the provisions of Rules
157 and 158 of the Shop Crafts Agreement
between Transportation Communications
International Union -- Carmen's Division and
the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Company (CSX
Transport ,ation, Inc.) (revised June 1, 1969)
and the service rights of Carmen T. E. Sties
and W. Bcwery (hereinafter 'claimants') when
the carrier allowed persons other than Carmen
to perform Carmen's work.
2. That accordingly, the claimants are entitled
to be compensated for four (4) hours each at
the Carmen's straight time rate for said
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 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.
As Third Party in Interest, the Brotherhood of Locomotive
Engineers was advised of the pendency of this dispute, but chose
not to file a submission with the Board.
Form 1 Award No. 12557
Page 2 Docket No. 12375-T
93-2-91-2-168
This Claim involves the Organization's allegation that its
Agreement was violated, when on November 22, 1988, a locomotive was
rerailed at Grave Yard, Richmond, Virginia, without the assistance
of Carmen. Many Awards of this Board have concluded that it is not
a violation of the Carmen's Agreement when strangers to the craft
are utilized in simple rerailing operations occurring within yard
limits. See for example, Second Division Award 10258, wherein the
Board denied a similar claim, stating:
"The facts of the record in this case indicate
that a wrecking crew was not called because
the routine nature of the derailment did not
require the assistance of a wrecking crew.
Thus, this Board concludes that the work in
question does not belong exclusively to
Carmen. The prevailing practice on this
property is in harmony with our decision as
indicated by the record. It is common
practice in routine situations such as is
present in this case to have various Crafts
perform the work. See Second Division Awards
3257, 3265, 3859, 4337, 5812, and 6361 among
others."
The Organization has not demonstrated that the foregoing
conclusion is erroneous, or that the practice described is
different. The Claim is without merit.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest:
Nancy ever - Secretary to the Board
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of July 1993.