BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES
CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD
COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: For many years .the station forces at Sheldon, Iowa have included positions covered by the scope and application of the Clerks' Rules Agreement, and the records show that as far back as October 16, 1923 the positions then in effect at that station were a Clerk's position and a Helper's position. As a result of changes, the Helper's position was the only position remaining at Sheldon covered by the Clerks' Agreement and was reclassified as a clerical position, No. 911, on April 7, 1950 as shown by Clerks' Bulletin No. 66. Copy of that bulletin is attached as Employes' Exhibit "A",
The occupant of the position is Zane Hudson, clerical seniority date of January 16, 1946 and non-clerical date of July 1, 1944 in Seniority District No. 41. The position is assigned Monday through Friday with rest days of Saturday and Sunday. In addition to performing the clerical duties at Sheldon, the work of handling mail is assigned to and comprises part of the work of that position.
OPINION OF BOARD: It is undisputed that prior to August 3, 1952, the incumbent of Clerical Position 911 (Claimant's position) was given a call on Saturday and Sunday to assist the Agent in handling mail on Train No. 11, however, the reason for dispensing with Claimant's assistance was due to the substantial decrease in .the volume of mail handled on Train No. 11. The Carrier describes this decrease as follows:
It is the Organization's contention that the discontinuance of this Sunday call constitutes a violation of the agreement which became effective September 1, 1949, and cite Rule 1 (Scope), Rule 28 (Work on Unassigned Days), Rule 32 (Overtime), Rule 34 (Notified or Called) and Rule 57 (Date Effective and Changes).
After reviewing the record and the evidence presented in this case we are unable to find sufficient reason for this Board to change its position in Award 8256, where this Division has practically this exact Claim before it for decision, and concluded that the Carrier did not violate the Agreement. Therefore, Claims 1 and 2 must be denied.
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, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and