NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Mortimer Stone, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES
BROOKLYN EASTERN DISTRICT TERMINAL
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Commitee of the
Brotherhood that:
1. The Carrier violated the Scope Rule and other provisions
of the Clerks' Agreement when it made a private contract with
L & A Markesano, to handle cement at Pidgeon Street Terminal,
said contract covering the unloading and handling of cement as
provided for in the Broklyn Eastern District Terminal's Local and
Proportional Freight Tariff, ICC No. 17, Page 8, Item 125, and
2. The work of checking, making reports and handling cement,
shall be asigned to employes, as per seniority districts and in accord
with the provisions of the Clerks' Agreement, and
3. The Carrier shall pay all affected employes, for each day
unassigned or for the difference in rates of pay, based on the number
of positions bulletined and required, starting on December 27th,
1954, and each day thereafter, until the violations are corrected.
4. The Carrier failed to deny this Claim, within sixty (60)
days after it was filed. Therefore, the Claim is payable as stipulated
in Article 5, Carrier's Proposal No, 7, of the August 21, 1954 Agreement.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
There is in effect a Rules
Agreement dated April 1st 1938, with Amendments dated July 30th 1949,
August 21, 1954 and July 7, 1955. The Rules Agreement will he considered
a part of the Statement of Facts. Various Rules may be referred to from
time to time without quoting in full.
This dispute involves two matters.
17861
9256-12
797
The claim is without merit and should be denied.
This claim has been completely handled with employes on this property.
OPINION OF BOARD:
Claim here is for farming out work belonging
to employes under the Clerks' Agreement and in addition to submitting the
claim on its merits the organization asserts that it must be sustained as
presented because of failure of carrier to deny the claim within sixty days
after it was filed as required by Section 1(a), Article V of the August 21,
1954 Agreement.
Carrier, in response, denies any farming out of work, asserts that it
did make timely denial of the claim and contends that the claim should not
be sustained for the reason that it is vague, indefinite and uncertain and
not made in behalf of any identifiable claimant.
The employes involved in the claim here submitted are neither named
nor identified. Section 1(a) of Article V of August 21, 1954, relied on by
petitioner also requires that all claims or grievances must be presented by or
in behalf of the employe involved. Where there is no identifiable claimant
in whose behalf the claim is made there is no proper claim before us upon
which to act and the tendered claim should be dismissed.
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 Employe involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934; and
The claim is not properly before this Division.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. SCHULTY
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of February 1960.