CORRECTED
Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 13209
Docket No. 13192
98-2-96-2-98
The Second Division consisted
of
the regular members and in addition Referee
Eckehard Muessig when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood Railway Carmen, Division of
( Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company
( (Western Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim
of
the Committee
of
the Union that:
1. That the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Western
Lines) on August 29, 1995, arbitrarily violated Rules 38(b), 33(a~
32 and 104
of
the MP&C Department Agreement, when it failed to
notify the Organization in writing within sixty (60) days from the
date
of
the claim,
of
the claim disallowance. Also when they
assigned Supervisor Driscoll from Ogden, Utah and Carmen
Brenkman from another seniority point to change out one (1) pair
of 100 ton wheel on a FLIX2730 at Lemay, UT, mile post 702.
2. That, accordingly, the Southern Pacific Transportation Company
be ordered to compensate furloughed Carmen K.A. Hipwell and
S.R. Crosbie eight (8) hours each at the pro rata rate
of
pay."
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.
Form 1 Award No. 13209
Page 2 Docket No. 13192
98-2-96-2-98
This Division of the A ijustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved
herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
This case involves similar circumstances and Agreement provisions as those
addressed in Second Division Award 13208. In this case, a Carrier Supervisor and a
Carman from Roper Yard on the Denver & Rio Grande Western ("DRGW") in Salt
Lake City were called to change a pair of wheels on a loaded hopper car in Lemay,
Utah, 11 stations west of Ogden, Utah. The Organization claims that the two Claimants
who were on furlough should have been called for the work.
At the outset, both parties assert time limit violations. The Board finds, under all
the circumstances, that this claim is best addressed on its merits.
With respect to the merits, while the dates and location are different, the essential
elements of this claim are the same as those addressed in Award 13208. We find here,
as we found in that case, that the recall of the two Claimants would not have been
practical and we also find no Agreement support for the claim.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 11th day of February 1998.