STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of The Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Lehigh Valley Railroad, that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: There is in full force and effect a collective bargaining agreement between the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, hereinafter refered to as Carrier or Management and The Order of Railroad Telegraphers, hereinafter referred to as Employes or Telegraphers. The agreement was effective February 1, 1948 and is, by reference, made a part hereof as though set out herein word for word. This dispute was handled on the property in the usual manner through the highest officer designated by Management to handle such disputes. Management has declined the claim of Employes and the dispute remains unadjusted. This dispute involves interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement and under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act as amended, this Board has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter.
This dispute concerns the handling of a train order (Form 19), by a track car operator at Smithboro, New York; such employe not being covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement.
Smithboro is a point on Carrier's line of railroad where Carrier formerly maintained a position of agent-telegrapher under the Telegraphers' Agreement. The position was abolished on December 19, 1952.
The Organization did attempt to persuade the Carrier to adopt a rule applicable at blind sidings. Failing in the attempt to negotiate such a rule, the Organization now seeks to obtain the equivalent of such by asking your Board to sustain the instant claim in the absence of a rule to support it. In view of the many awards this Board has rendered against such action, we feel certain that the Board will not even attempt to do so.
That the Board will not make agreements nor write rules has been decided in many awards. A few such awards of the Third Division are:
Of course, there are many more by this Division, as well as the other Divisions of the National Railroad Adjustment Board. Also, many awards have been rendered as to the merits of the type of claim here under consideration. Those which have been decided on rules similar to ours have been denied. To mention a few, the Third Division has denied such claims in award numbers:
Particular attention is directed to Award No. 4259 and Award No. 6959: the rule involved in both of those awards is practically identical with our Rule 32. There is no question that the meaning of the rules in those awards and our rule is identical. The rules in those awards are also confined to points where telegraph or telephone offices are located and where operators are employed, etc. The Carriers' position in those awards reflects practically the same history of the rule involved as in the instant case.
The Carrier respectfully submits that this claim is entirely without merit, and requests the Board to deny this claim.
The facts presented in this submission were made a matter of discussion with the Committee in conference on the property.
OPINION OF BOARD: The claim presented here involves the same parties and the identical issue set forth in this Division's Award 8146 which held that the Agreement between this Carrier and The Order of Railroad Telegraphers was not violated when it caused, required or permitted employes not covered by that agreement to receive, copy and deliver Track Car Permits at Mountain Top, Pennsylvania.
That a Train Order rather than a Track Car Permit form was used in the instant case, and that in Award 8146 the work was done by section foremen and signal maintainers, are not material to our decision here because in each case the Petitioner asserts an exclusive right to the work involved, whether it be handling track car permits or train orders, and past practice does not support that position. 854016 904