STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Pennsylvania Railroad Company that,
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACT: Prior to 1948, Bordentown Station was a one man Agency. Due to the increase of business at this station beginning with 1947 and with a substantial increase for each succeeding year up to and including 1952, the Local Chairman on the New York Division listed the subject as shown in statement of claim for discussion with the Superintendent at meeting held on February 4, 1952.
In letter dated August 14, 1952, the Superintendent denied the claim. On November 4, 1952, a joint submission was completed for further handling with the General Manager of the Eastern Region. This subject was discussed by the General Manager and the General Chairman at meeting held on January 27, 1953. On January 29, 1953, the General Manager, in a letter to the General Chairman, asked that the matter be remanded to the Division Superintendent for a joint check to be arranged by the Superintendent and the Local Chairman, This ,joint check to compare the duties and responsibilities of the Agent at Bordeatown with those of the agencies at Lambertville, N. J. and Hightstown, N. J.
On June 11, 1953, the committee selected to conduct the joint check, submitted their report to the Superintendent and Local Chairman. In letter dated June 30, 1953 with a copy of the report attached, the General Manager asked the General Chairman for concurrence in accepting the report of the Committee. On August 17, 1953, the General Chairman listed this subject
The Carrier has shown that the hours, days, duties or responsibilities of the Agent position at Bordentown have not been substantially changed and that as a consequence thereof paragraph (b) of Regulation 8-A-1 does not impose any requirement upon the Carrier to enter into negotiations with the Organization for the purpose of effecting an adjustment in the monthly rate of pay of said position.
Therefore, the Carrier respectfully submits that your Honorable Board should deny the claim of the Employes in this matter.
All data contained herein have been presented to the Organization involved.
OPINION OF BOARD: This claim is based upon a misapprehension of the facts as disclosed by this record, and shows no violation of its rule 8-A-1(b) relied upon by the Organization.
Claim is predicated upon the rate of pay that was made effective in 1946 whereas the present schedule shows an adjustment upwards was made in 1951.
This rule is plain and u_ambipuous. Record doe,; not disclose what the situation is today.
11' the disparagement in duties and responsibilities of claimant justify a new consideration, it may be started at any time.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the psrtic, 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 respectivolv Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
That th's D·vision of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and