BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES
THE DENVER AND RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD
COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS, Mr. R. E. Smithlin entered the service of the Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company on September 26, 1940 and holds seniority in the agent's district, Colorado Springs, as of that date.
On July 22, 1947 position of Ticket Clerk No. 3 at Colorado Springs was bulletined. Mr. Smithlin was the senior bidder on the position, but the position was awarded to Mr. W. H. Maness with seniority date of May 31, 1945.
Protest was made by Mr. Smithlin and the case was carried to the court of last resort on the property, and the Carrier refuses to join the organization in submission of this dispute. Therefore, it is being filed ex parte with Third Division, National Railroad Adjustment Board.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: Employes base their position on Rule 8 which provides:
The information given in the above quoted letter was based on the fact that the Company furnishing our Fidelity bond has consistently declined to approve bond for employes involved in cash irregularities. The Carrier has one master bond covering all employes and once an employe has been involved in mishandling of funds, the Firelity Company has never approved the re-employment of such employe in a bonded position. Colorado Springs is a joint ticket office, handling tickets for the AT&SF Railway, the Colorado & Southern Railway and the CRI&P Railway, in addition to D&RGW ticket sales.
In any event, in view of the definite understanding reached at the time Mr. Smithlin was reinstated on June 11, 1946, it is the Carrier's position that that letter is controlling in this case and Rule 8 of the current agreement of May 1, 1946, is in no manner applicable.
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant entered the service of the Carrier on September 26, 1940, and holds seniority as of that date in the Colorado Springs seniority district. On July 22, 1947, the position of Ticket Clerk No. 3 at Colorado Springs was bulletined. Claimant was the senior bidder. 4386-4 8j(j
The Carrier declined the bid because of a letter agreement bearing the date of June 11, 1946, wherein it is stated:
The foregoing letter agreement resulted from an occurrence which took place in 1946. The record shows in respect thereto that Claimant was dismissed from the service for "failure to report actual amount of money received from sale of a ticket on March 8, 1946". After negotiation between the parties, Claimant was reinstated in accordance with the letter agreement of June 11, 1946.
It is evident from the record that the dismissal of Claimant from service became final. Thereafter he had no rights whatever under the Clerks' Agreement. The Carrier, however, agreed to reinstate Claimant under the conditions set forth in the letter agreement of June 11, 1946. The Organization attempts to construe and limit the force of the agreement to the date of his reinstatement only. The letter will not sustain such a construction. It clearly implies that he will not at any time be permitted to exercise his seniority rights on a bonded position.
It is urged that there was a gentleman's agreement made at the time the reinstatement was agreed upon. It is fundamental that a written agreement embodies all negotiations and oral agreements made at the time and prior to the execution of the written agreement. All the rights that Claimant now has under the Clerks' Agreement arise through the letter agreement. What motivated the Carrier and the Organization in entering into the letter agreement is not important here. The Carrier has a clear right to insist upon the letter agreement being carried out as made. This Board has no more right to destroy agreements than it has to create them. No basis for an affirmative award exists.
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