Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 12921
Docket No. 12814
95-2-93-2-196
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert E. Peterson when award was rendered.
(International Brotherhood of Firemen
( and Oilers
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Chesapeake
( and Ohio Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Ill.
That under the current and controlling
agreement the Firemen and Oilers working at
Huntington Locomotive Shop with and/or
supporting the 'Standard Line' have been
denied proper compensation since June 15,
1992.
2. That accordingly, we are requesting (20)
minutes pay at time and one-half rate for all
the Firemen and Oilers at the Huntington shop
who were not allowed the paid lunch since June
15. Also, we are requesting that all
positions be paid lunch as per rule 4 of the
Firemen and Oilers agreement."
FINDINGS:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved
in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.
Form 1 Award No. 12921
Page 2 Docket No. 12814
95-2-93-2-196
The claim and the Rules in dispute are quite similar to the
claim which was presented to this Board in Second Division Award
12915, except that the dispute here involves the Huntington, West
Virginia, Locomotive Repair Facility of the Carrier on the former
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company property in the establishment
of a "standard line" of operation for inspection, whereas the
previous dispute involved a like operation at the Carrier shops in
Waycross, Georgia, on the former Seaboard Coast Line Railroad.
In the case here at issue, beginning June 15, 1992, nine of 74
positions being filled by employees represented by the Organization
were assigned to work on a newly established standard line
operation at the Huntington Shop for the complete inspection of
locomotives. The nine positions were assigned to work on a twoshift basis (3:00 PM to 11:00 PM and 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM) including
an allowance of 20 minutes for lunch. Employees who are
represented by the various Shop Craft unions were assigned to all
three shifts of the standard line operation.
The other 65 employees represented by the Organization, who
held various positions in the Back Shop prior to establishment of
the standard line, continued thereafter to be assigned to work a
total of eight and one-half hours, with a 30-minute unpaid lunch
period.
The Organization maintains that whereas Rule 4(b) of the
Agreement was applicable where one or two shifts were in effect,
that when the Carrier went to a three-shift operation for the
standard line Rule 4(c) became the applicable contract language
governing the assignment of both shifts and lunch periods.
Rule 4(c) reads.
"(c) Where three shifts are employed, the spread of each
shift shall be eight hours, including an allowance of 20
minutes for lunch. In event the requirements of the
service will not permit the employee taking 20 minutes
for lunch, extra compensation will not be allowed.
Members of the retiring force whose work is to be taken
up by the members of the oncoming force which relieves
it, will, where necessary, explain the status of the work
that is being transferred. In making this transfer it is
not expected that the retiring force will remain beyond
regular quitting time, but it is expected that the
oncoming force shall be on hand in sufficient time to
make the transfer without delaying members, or any
member, of the retiring force."
F
7.
1 Award No. 12921
F 3 Docket No. 12814
95-2-93-2-196
The arguments of the parties concerning the application of
F 4(c) are not unlike those which each party presented in the
2 ing of the like dispute in Award 12915, albeit the Rule there
.estion was identified as Rule 3(c). The Organization did here
a. ~ionally assArt that all Huntington Locomotive Shop employees
o entitled to the benefit of Rule 4(c) because they are working
H._n
or supporting the new standard line operation. However, there
being no showing of record as to what work these other employees
were required to perform that could be held to constitute their
being a part of the workforce in the standard line operation, the
Board is not able to give credence to such argument.
For the reasons set forth by this Board in its disposition of
a _ike claim in Award 12915, the instant claim is found to be
without necessary Agreement support. Accordingly, we cannot
conclude, as urged by the organization, that in establishing a
three-shift standard line operation that Rule 4(c) prescribed that
all assignments at the Huntington Locomotive Shop, regardless of an
assigned shop or work area, have starting times and lunch periods
the same as established for those employees assigned to the
standard line operation. The language of Rule 4(c) cannot be read
t:: prescribe that because the Carrier would establish a three-shift
c.:eration for one separate area of the shop it has to change the
hours of all other assignments at the separate shop or work areas
so as to provide a paid lunch period for all employees.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified
.;c-re, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant (s) not
_ : made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of August 1995.