BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN OF AMERICA THE DELAWARE AND HUDSON RAILROAD CORPORATION
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America on the Delaware and Hudson Railroad that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On March 22, 23, 24 and 25, 1948, employes not covered by the Signalmen's agreement consumed ten hours on each of the above dates painting signal apparatus housings, inside and out, at West Main, Scott, and Walnut Streets, Bainbridge, N. Y.
The signal apparatus housings involved are located on the signal maintenance territory of the claimants, and the work of constructing these signal apparatus housings was performed by the signal forces on the A. & S. Division.
The work of painting signal apparatus has been performed by the employes of the Signal Department for many years and was being done by them when the present agreement became effective. It has been generally recognized as signal work. Painting is a necessary part of the installation of signal and interlocking apparatus.
The claimants were available for the Scope work involved in this dispute. They could have been used outside their regularly assigned hours The agreement provides a method of payment for time worked outside of regular hours.
A formal request was filed with the Supervisor of Signals and has been progressed in the proper and usual manner up to and including the highest
The Carrier denies that the work performed in this case comes within the Scope Rule of the Signalmen's Agreement. The painting of buildings used for housing signal apparatus has always been performed by B. & B. painters.
The identical work which is here claimed by Signalmen was the subject of claim presented to the Third Division, National Railroad Adjustment Board by the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes in Docket No. MW-4784. Award No. 4845, issued under date of April 28, 1950, sustained claim of Maintenance of Way Employes for this work.
Management affirmatively states that all matters referred to in the foregoing have been discussed with the Committee and made part of the particular question in dispute.
OPINION OF BOARD: This docket involves the question of the coverage of the Scope Rule of the Signalmen's Agreement to the painting of signal apparatus housings. It is argued on behalf of the Carrier that we cannot proceed to a determination of this claim on the merits because no notice has been given to the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes who have contended for the performance of this identical work. This latter fact is evidenced by the claim in Award No. 4845.
The question of the requirement of notice to other "employes involved" in disputes submitted to this Board under Section 3, First (j) of the Railway Labor Act has long been a source of contention on this Division. Our most recent Award on the subject is Award No. 5432. The latter Award indicates that the Referee therein made an exhaustive study of our previous Awards on the subject as well as the decisions of the Courts with respect thereto. Because of the extreme importance of the question in connection with the functioning of this Board, we have reviewed the matter anew. We find ourselves in agreement with the reasoning expounded at length in Award No. 5432. There is little we can add to the well-reasoned Opinion of the Board in that Award. We do note, however, that, in addition to the First Division Awards referred to therein, said Division issued its Award No. 14903 on November 5, 1951, involving the question of the asserted rights of trainmen to protect temporary grade crossings. There a decision on the merits was refused because the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes whose rights might have been affected had not been given notice of the proceedings. We conclude, therefore, that on the present state of this record we may not proceed to a determination of this dispute on the merits. The claim will be dismissed without prejudice so that the Employes may take whatever action they may deem advisable with respect thereto hereafter.
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 21,4934; 5599-5 1251