PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES




MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RAILROAD COMPANY

OF TEXAS


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes that:


(1) The carrier (Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company, MissouriKansas-Texas Railroad Company of Texas) violated and continues to violate its several agreements with the organization, when on September 14, 1943, after due notice, it failed and refused to assign to positions covered by the said agreements, incidental clerical work then and now performed at Atoka, Oklahoma, by employes working outside the scope of the clerical agreement: and,


(2) That the carrier (Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company, Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company of Texas) refused and continues to refuse to classify and restore the work to the scope and operation of the clerical agreement; and,


(3) That the carrier (Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company, Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company of Texas) shall now be required by an appropriate award and order of the Board to create and maintain appropriate positions under the clerical agreement and assign to the said positions and restore to the scope and operation of all the agreements and rules extant between the respective parties, all of the incidental clerical work, as set forth in the Statement of Fact, there to remain until removed therefrom by the proper processes set forth in the agreement (Rule 78) and the Railway Labor Act-1934-amended; and,


(4) That the said positions shall be advertised and assigned under the appropriate rules of the agreement as of September 14, 1943, and that any and all employes adversely affected by the illegal and unlawful act of the carrier in assigning the said work and duties to the positions and or persons not covered by the clerical agreement, shall be reimbursed for all their money losses.


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board finds:

That the dispute was certified to the Third Division of the Adjustment Board ex parte by complainant party; and








uolslela pstqy JO aapxo .4a
 axvoa yuUT>tysnrav (IVOZIIIIVZI zvxlolyvH

                            passluUSTp asep


                  QZIV&1V


'pa;uz.z.~
 Bqaaaq si Isanbas qalqm 'area slay ;o lemWpqqjm VUT Tsanbax uolsInca palqy aq1
 ;o dis;aaaas aqj o3 uolizalunwwoa lewao; a passeappe dlxed ;uzuIZIducoa aq3
 'MT 'TE ~Inr 10 OPP aapun pus 'plaq uaaq seq uoaaaq3 8ulaeaq ou 4eqy

                  619 g-0999