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:










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.




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.








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.