DISPUTE.-" Claim of Mr. I. E. Weidman for recognition by the Carrier as being senior to and holding rights over Mr. W. C. Nicholson in the classification of water service repairman, Central Division.
"(b) Claim of Mr. Weidman for compensation covering all time lost-less any amount earned in or out of the service-from February 1, 1934."
FINDINGS.-The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier and the employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involve(] herein.
The parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.An agreement bearing date of January 1, 1928, is in effect between tile Parties.
The parties have certified the following "Joint SGitement of Facts", and the Third Division so finds:
"Effective February 4, 1934, carrier reduced force of water service repairmen, Central Division, displacing I. E. Weidman. Following are service records of Messrs. W. C. Nicholson and I. E. Weidman:
Prior to February 4, 1934, the water service repairmen organization on the Central Division (one seniority district) consisted of:
J. C. Nicholson- --_-----_--_VanBuren, Ark----__--___-__---_--__- 4-1-03 W. C. Nicholson -_--_---_.___--- Russellville, Ark _-------._-_.------5-1-13 1. E. Weidman-----..---__-----_-_--__ Wagoner, Okla---_-------_----_-.------- lo-l-22
~ District as shown on seniority roster compiled as of January 1, 1934, and hearing approval of the Carrier's Division Ensineer, Superintendent, and the Employes' representatives, i. e., Division Chairman, M. of W. Employes.
Effective February 4, 1934, one of the water service repairmen positions (Wagoner, Oklahoma) was abolished and territory of the remaining two men reassigned to fulfill requirements of the service.
Mr. Weidman, being the junior of the three employes of this elass on that seniority district as refleeteal by the seniority roster then in effect, was displaced under the following schedule rule of the wage agreement:
"RMUCLVC FnaCE-RVIX 3, Par. (a) : When force is reduced, the senior man in the subdepartment, on the seniority district, capable of doing the work, shall be retained."
I. E. Weidman, the claimant in this dispute, thereupon contended that he should be assigned to the position of motor-car repairman created on or about the same date, February 4, 1934, he being senior to the employe who was at that time appointed to the position. Upon being advised that the carrier would not agree to a change in this assignment on the grounds that the positions of water-service repairman and motor-car repairman were separate units in the subdepartment, and he (Weidman) lacked seniority as motor-car repairman, the claim made subject of this dispute was instituted, except that part (b) of said claim was not presented to the carrier prior to submission of same to the Adjustment Board, and the Carrier has accordingly challenged the right of the Adjustment Board to make an afrmative award thereon.
The service records above quoted show that during the period January 1923 to July 1927, W. C. Nicholson served as motor-car repairman and that as of July 1925, 1. E. Weidman was promoted to water-service repairman, serving continuously until relieved account reduction ill force February 1934.
It was understood by both parties to this dispute that the classification of employes on the seniority roster respectively as water-service repairman and motor-car repairman prohibited any employee to accrue seniority in one of these classes while filling a position of the other class.
I. E. Weidman tinder date of February 15, 1928, protested the seniority dates showing him to be junior to W. C. Nicholson after the first posting of such dates following the return of the latter from the position of motor-car repairman to that of water-service repairman in July 1927, and that though he was then advised that the correction would be made, it was not done.
Subsequent seniority lists continuing to show I. E. Weidman junior to W. C. Nicholson were not protested again until May 3, 1933, at which time Weldman was advised that his protest was disclaimed as the same date had been thus shown for the past three years without protest. Similarly, no action was taken on later protests dated .January 4, 1934, amt January 24, 1935.
The following rules in the agreement effective January 1, 1928, also have been cited by the parties as being applicable, and the Third Division so finds:
It is found that while W. C. Nicholson entered the servic-a of the carrier in 1918, approximately five years prior to the time that 1. E. Weidman was first employed, and is shown on the seniority list as of January 1, 1934, as waterservice repairman with seniority date of May 1, 1918, thus being shown senior to Weidman, he (Nicholson), by reason of his service as motor-car repairman during the period which ended in July 7927 became junior to said I. E. Weidman, and the Third Division finds that by reason thereof 1. E. Weidman is entitled to the position of water-service repairman now held by W. C. Nicholson.
Claim of I. E. Weidman for recognition by tile Carrier as being senior to and holding rights over Mr. W. C. Nicholson is the classification of water-service repairman, Central Division, is sustained.
(b) In view of all the circumstances surrounding this claim, the claim for time lost is denied.
By Order of Third Division: