Carrier that the work properly devolves upon the dispatching forces and that the establishment of a night Steno-Clerk is of a seasonal and temporary nature.

From the Carrier's statement of facts it will be noted that all the work performed by the Steno-Clerk prior to the establishment of such seasonal and temporary position was performed by train dispatchers and the night Division Trainmaster and that during the time the night Division Trainmaster was assigned all the work which was performed by the night Steno-Clerk was performed by the Division Trainmaster. The work which the night Steno-Clerk performed was the ordinary clerical duties of the night Division Trainmaster, therefore, it was interchangeable as between the position of Division Trainmaster and that of night Steno-Clerk.

During the time that the night Division Trainmaster's position was in effect there was no work to be performed by the night Steno-Clerk, and, therefore, that position was discontinued and when the position of night Division Trainmaster was discontinued, position of night Steno-Clerk was re-established. It is, therefore, the position of the Carrier that when the position of night Division Trainmaster was re-established it was proper to restore the work he had formerly performed and recognized as his duties to him and to discontinue the position of night Steno-Clerk.

In this connection, the Carrier would call the attention of your Honorable Board to Award No. 931 and the following from the opinion of your Honorable Board as contained in Award No. 1314:

"With these principles in mind we return to their practical application to the facts of this case. The carrier urges that many of the duties of the Chief Dispatcher's clerk were the ordinary duties of the Chief Dispatcher; that they were interchangeable and that the clerk's position was due to an overflow of the Chief Dispatcher's duties in busy times. If so, and we have no reason to doubt that fact, such duties as the Dispatcher retained which were incident and reasonable appropriate to his position after the abolition of his clerk's position would seem to come under the ruling of Award 931. Where the duties incidental and normal to a position not under the

It is the contention of the Carrier that it was not a violation of the Agreement with the Clerks' Organization to discontinue the position of night Steno-Clerk at the time the position of night Division Trainmaster was re-established and to restore the work to that position which had been performed by the night Steno-Clerk during the time that the night Division Trainmaster's position was abolished. Your Honorable Board is respectfully petitioned to so rule.

OPINION OF BOARD: The material facts are not in dispute. On December 10, 1940, the position of Steno-Clerk in the Division Trainmaster's office at San Antonio was discontinued and all of the duties of the position were assigned to a newly created position of Night Division Trainmaster (Night Chief Dispatcher.) The duties thus transferred consisted of from 5'48" to 8'05" of clerical work per day. The position of Steno-Clerk was last established in May, 1940, and was in existence on November 1, 1940. The rights of the parties are governed by a Rules Agreement and a Supplemental Memorandum Agreement both of which became effective November 1, 1940.

Rule 1 (a) provides that the rules shall cover the hours of service and working condition of "Group 1, Clerk, ***" and Rule 1 (b) is as follows:-

"Position referred to in this agreement belongs (sic) to the employes covered thereby and no position shall be removed from this agreement except by agreement."

"Employes who are used three (3) hours or more for the majority of the working days of the month, in the compiling, writing and/or calculating incident to keeping records and accounts, transcribing and writing letters, bills, reports, statements and similar work, and to the operation of office mechanical equipment and devices shall be designated as clerks."

"(a) It is recognized and agreed that all of the work referred to in Rule 1 of the agreement dated November 1, 1940, between the carrier and the Brotherhood belongs to and will be assigned to employes holding seniority rights and working under the Clerk's agreement except as provided below."

The carrier says that this language is clearly definitive of the intent of the parties and requires that the work encompassed must be found encompassed by Rule 1 of the Controlling Agreement.

The work consists of compiling reports and posting records for more than three hours each day. Rule 2 (a) must be considered as part of Rule 1 since its only office is to define the word "clerks" as used in Rule 1. Under this definition all employes who are engaged in compiling reports and posting records for more than three hours per day are clerks and it must necessarily follow that the doing of such work for more than three hours per day is clerk's work.

"The work which the night Steno-Clerk performed was the ordinary clerical duties of the Night Division Trainmaster."

This statement concedes that the duties are clerical but it is inaccurate in describing them as "the ordinary duties of the Night Division Trainmaster," since when the Steno-Clerk was employed there was no Night Division Trainmaster. The new position was created because of an increase in business but there seems to be insufficient work to occupy a Trainmaster full time and he was given seven hours per day, approximately, of already existing clerical work.

"Rule 1 referred to in Section (a) of the Memorandum Agreement deals exclusively with positions and does not classify the work which comes under the Clerks' Agreement and it is only when the employes who are listed in Rule 1 are assigned to perform clerical work that such employes come under the provisions of the Clerks' Agreement."

But Rule 2 (a) provides that employes who are used three hours a day in clerical work shall be designated (i. e. listed) as clerks.

The contention that the agreement deals with positions and not with work is based upon certain language in Award No. 615 (Docket No. CI,550). It was there said that--

"* * * it is a mistaken concept that the source of the right to exclusive performance of the work covered by the agreement is to be found in either the scope or seniority rules; they may be searched in

But here we have the supplemental agreement expressly providing:

The other awards chiefly relied upon by the carrier deal with the allocation of clerical work amounting to less than three hours per day and not to the classification of an employe doing more than three hours clerical work and therefore they are not in point.

The provisions of the agreement are clear and unambiguous and we may not look beyond its terms to find the intention of the parties.

The newly appointed employe regularly performs clerical work as defined by the agreement for more than three hours each day. By the terms of the agreement lie is a "clerk" and the position is a clerical position notwithstanding he is designated by the carrier as "Night Division Trainmaster."

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board after giving the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

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;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

That the carrier violated the current agreement as contended by the petitioner.

AWARD