NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
PULLMAN SYSTEM
THE PULLMAN COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: The Order of Railway Conductors, Pullman System, claims that The Pullman Company violated Rules 25, 31 and 64 of the Agreement between The Pullman Company and its Conductors, when
1. On March 5, 1948, and subsequent dates, two (2) Pullman cars in service were permitted of operate from 30th Street Station to Board Street Station, Philadelphia, without the services of a Pullman conductor.
3. We also ask that at the expiration of the bulletining and assignment period the Philadelphia District conductor entitled to this run be credited and paid, as provided in the rules of the Agreement, for each trip he was denied the right to operate in this assignment.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: There is in evidence an Agreement between The Pullman Company and Conductors in its service, effective September 1, 1945, Revised Effective January 1, 1948. Also, attached is copy of a "Memorandum of Understanding, Subject: Compensation for Wage Loss;" dated August 8 1946 as Exhibit No. 1. This dispute has been progressed up to and including the highest officer of the Carrier designated for that purpose, whose letter denying the claim is attached as Exhibit No. 2.
On March 5, 1948, and subsequent dates, two Pullman ears were operated together, in service, between 30th Street Station, Philadelphia, and Broad Street Station, Philadelphia, without a Pullman conductor in charge, as required by Rule 64 (a) of the Agreement reading:
The two cars which were operated without a conductor were: Line 2357 (1) Washington Broad Street Station, Philadelphia, Line 2733 (1) Richmond to Broad Street Station, Philadelphia. These cars were operated from Washington, D. C., to 30th Street Station, Philadelphia, by the Pullman conductor
OPINION OF BOARD: The facts in this case do not appear to be in dispute. A Pullman car in Line 2373 operates from Richmond to Philadelphia in charge of a Richmond District Pullman conductor. Upon arrival at Washington this car is attached to P.R.R. Train No. 108, together with Pullman car in 2357, both cars having Philadelphia as their destination. P.R.R. Train No. 109 arrives at the 30th Street Station, Philadelphia, at 4:36 A.M., where the two cars above mentioned are removed from the train which continues on to New York with the Richmond District conductor in charge of its remaining Pullman cars.
The two cars in Lines 2373 and 2357 are handled by an electric switch engine from the 30th Street Station to th Broad Street Station, a rail distance of approximately three miles and requiring about 59 minutes. The cars are parked at the Broad Street Station at about 5:355 A.M. where they remain with permitted occupancy by passengers until 8 A.M.
The claim is predicated upon the operation of the two Pullman cars referred to above between the 30th Street Station and Broad Street Station without the services of a Pullman conductor.
The Organization bases its case on Rule 64 (a) of the current Agreement, the pertinent part of which reads as follows:
The significant provisions of Rule 64 (a) are that it is limited in its application to at least two Pullman cars in service, and that such cars must be a train or a part of a train. This conclusion is supported by Award No. 3759, from which we quote:
In the light of this well considered precedent we have no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the two Pullman cars at Philadelphia continued "in service"' until they were vacated by the occupying passengers at or before 8:00 A.M. The train of which these cars had been a part, on and before their arrival at Philadelphia, had proceeded on to its destination, which was New York. These cars had been dropped from the train at the 30th Street Station. Their subsequent movement to the Broad Street Station did not constitute a train or part of a train, within the meaning of the Rule as it has been interpreted.
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 Employe involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employe 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 4814-17 113