NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
John Day Larkin, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY (Eastern District)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of The
Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Union Pacific Railroad (Eastern
District)
1. That Carrier violated and continues to violate the Agreement between the parties hereto, when commencing on January 13,
1953, and continuing thereafter, acting unilaterally, it changed the
classification of the position of Agent, Concordia, Kansas.
2. That Carrier violated and continues to violate the Agreement between the parties hereto, when commencing on January 13,
1953, and continuing thereafter, acting unilaterally, it declared the
position Clerk-telegrapher, Concordia, Kansas, to be abolished, when
in fact the work of such position remained to be and was required
to be performed.
3. That Carrier violated and continues to violate the Agreement between the parties hereto, when, on the 13th day of January,
1953, and continuing thereafter, it, acting unilaterally, consolidated
and merged the position of Agent with that of Clerk-telegrapher at
Concordia, Kansas, and caused and required the occupant of the position of Agent to perform the work, services and duties of the two
separately negotiated positions.
4. That Carrier be required to restore position of Clerktelegrapher, Concordia, Kansas.
5. That F. N. Van Wie, P. E. Hoopes and R. L. Holman were
owners of regular positions and displaced therefrom, solely and
proximately caused by the violative acts of Carrier hereinabove set
out, shall be compensated for all wages lost and expenses, if any,
incurred by reason of such wrongful displacement; that any and all
other employes adversely affected by such violative acts shall be
made whole for any such loss, including expenses, incurred thereby.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: There is in full force and
effect an agreement between Union Pacific Railroad Company (Eastern District), hereinafter referred to as Carrier or Company and The Order of
[10011
7359-44
1044
It is hereby affirmed that all information and data herein set forth have
been furnished to, discussed with, or are known to the Employes' Organization
or the Claimants.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
Prior to January 13, 1953, Carrier had at
Concordia, Kansas, two employes classified as follows:
Agent, monthly rated (Rule 2), no assigned hours, work days
Monday through Saturday, Rest days: Sunday.
Telegrapher-Clerk, hourly rated (Rule 3), 8 A. M. to 5 P. M.
(one hour for lunch) Monday through Friday, Rest days: Saturday
and Sunday.
On January 7 1953, Carrier's Assistant Superintendent, H. P. Jopling, in
Kansas City issued the following order to Agent W. F. Jacobs at Concordia:
"Arrange abolish position telegrapher-clerk, Concordia, giving
usual 5 days notice taking position off at close of shift Monday,
Jan. 12th. Acknowledge. D-242".
This order was complied with and beginning January 13, 1953, the
Agent was required to perform such duties as had previously been performed
by the telegrapher-clerk. The Organization is pressing this claim, contending
that Carrier's action was in violation of Rule 7 of the parties' Agreement
of February 1, 1951, which is as follows:
"Rule 7. Changes in Positions and Rates of Pay. Positions
(not employes) shall be rated. Changes in classification of positions
or rates of pay will be made only by agreement between the General
Manager and General Chairman."
We do not agree that there was either a change of classification or
a change in rate of pay. Therefore, there has been no violation of Rule 7.
The Carrier simply abolished a position which it decided was no longer needed.
This in no way conflicts with the restrictions of Rule 7.
Agents are assigned to be in charge of such local offices. These monthly
rated agents, covered by Rule 2 are not prohibited the use of telegraphic
equipment as are those hourly rated agents in the small stations covered by
Rule 4 of the parties' Agreement. The agent at Concordia, Kansas was and
is required at times to perform telegraphic service. The record shows that
this was done before as well as after the termination of the position of
Telegrapher-Clerk. This Agent is covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement
with the Carrier and his duties are not specifically restricted to exclude
work which may have been performed by the Telegrapher-Clerk.
The language of Rule 7 does not say that the Carrier cannot abolish a
position without agreement between the General Manager and the General
Chairman. It only provides that rates of pay and changes of classification
must be agreed upon. To sustain the claim now before us would, in effect,
put us in the position of denying the Carrier the right to abolish jobs found
to be uneconomical to operate. We do not think that such was the intent
of the parties when they adopted Rule 7.
We find no basis upon which to sustain this claim.
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:
7359-45
1045
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respecVvely 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 Agreement was not violated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: A. Ivan Tummon
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of June, 1956.