C.R. ENGELBACH 8 8 8

H.W. HOBELL 16

M.S. RICE 16

J.E. PUHALLA 8 8 8

S.A. MEYERS 16

T.C. BISHOP 8 8 8

P.G. MOHLER 16

T.E. BENNETT 16

P.M. DAVIDSON 16'

L.E. DENT 16

R.W. BIERMAN 16

R.J. LEWIS 16

C.H. GROVES 16

R.D. MORRISON 16

J.J. MILLER 16

W.E. WHETZEL 8 8 8"

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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.

At 2:00 AM on December 31, 1991, 18 cars derailed in Allingdal, West Virginia. On January 2, 1992, Carrier utilized an outside contractor, Donahue Brothers, to clear the wreck. Carrier did not call the two regularly assigned wreck crew members because they were scheduled elsewhere.

On February 28, 1992, the instant claim was filed by Local Chairman T.C. Bishop on behalf of himself and 15 other members of the Cumberland, Maryland, Tool Car Crew. It is the Organization's contention that under Rule 1421A of the Agreement, Carrier is required to use a 16-person wrecking crew to assist an outside contractor at derailments. That was the number of members assigned as of December 4, 1975. The fact that Carrier elected not to fill positions as members retire does not relieve it of its obligations to use the proper complement. The Organization believes that Carrier recognizes the utilization of the Cumberland Tool Car Extra List as a mechanism for complying with the intent of Rule 142.

A review of the record reveals that this is one more in a long line of claims alleging virtually the same facts and raising the same arguments as are present here. All of these cases have come down on the side of the Carrier. In the most recent decision (Second Division Award 12735, issued on September 13, 1994), the Board concluded as follows:

"After a full and complete review of the Rule and the onproperty dispute, the Board finds its attention directed to prior Awards. In three separate decisions this Board found that the Carrier need not call upon relief wrecking crew Carmen. The point of this claim is to provide compensation to Car-men off the extra list who are clearly not covered by the language of the Rule. The Claimants are not members of the assigned wrecking crew.

The Board is constrained by prior Awards unless it determines that the Awards are palpably erroneous (Second Division Awards 11702, 11506, 11323). We do not in our review find the Awards to be in error."

AWARD