NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of The Order
of Railroad Telegraphers on the Norfolk and Western Railway that:
1. The action of the Carrier in transferring work performed by
the employes of the Carrier at City Point Junction Tower to employes
of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad at Petersburg, Virginia, on or
about November 17, 1954, was in violation of the agreement between
the parties; that
2. The work thus transferred to Atlantic Coast Line Railroad employes shall be restored to the employes of the Norfolk and Western
Railway Company; and that
3. H. R. Geiger, P. W. Leftwich and/or all other employes of the
Norfolk and Western Railway Company adversely affected by such
violative action on the part of the Carrier shall be compensated for
any loss in earnings during the period of time that such transfer of
work to Atlantic Coast Line Railroad employes is permitted to
continue.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: For many years prior to November 17, 1954, three positions of operator-levermen at Petersburg, Virginia,
have been listed in the Telegraphers' Agreement with the Norfolk and Western
Railway. The prevailing agreement, effective December 1, 1939, lists these
positions as follows:
"NORFOLK DIVISION
Petersburg First O. & L. $.755
Second O. & L. .755
Third O. & L. .755"
The rates of pay have been adjusted from time to time since 1939, and on
November 17, 1954, were fixed at $1.805 per hour. The office was known as
"D" Tower.
1371
9388-25
61
of differences arising, can result only by sustaining and relying on
agreements entered into by the authorized representatives of the
employes' organizations."
Second Division Award 186:
"The security of labor organizations rests on the principle of sustaining the decisions and actions of the duly authorized representatives
of labor groups. Were we to begin reversing such decisions and making exceptions to this principle, we would be establishing precedents
that would be detrimental to and that would eventually destroy the
very structure of collective bargaining."
Fourth Division Award 1023:
"The binding settlement of disputes by duly authorized representatives of the parties is a fundamental keystone of any labor agreement.
* * * those settlements have been reached by the duly authorized
representatives of the parties and those settlements are binding
upon the carrier, its officials, its agents, the employes, their representatives and the Organization. No procedure or principle exists
under the agreement between the parties or under the Railway Labor
Act for a review or reversal of such settlements."
The claim in the instant case is made in behalf of H. R. Geiger and P. W.
Leftwich. Messrs. Geiger and Leftwich were properly displaced at Petersburg
November 17, 1954, under provisions of the Washington Agreement and the
11-3-54 Agreement, and, therefore, it is the Carrier's position the claim in
behalf of these employes finds no support in any rule of the Telegraphers'
Agreement.
In connection with that part of the claim, "all other employes of the
Norfolk and Western Railway Company adversely affected," the Carrier
calls attention to the first sentence of Article V, Section 1, (a), of the Time
Limit on Claims rules, effective January 1, 1955, and which reads:
"All claims or grievances must be presented in writing by or on
behalf of the employe involved, to the officer of the Carrier authorized
to receive same, within 60 days from the date of the occurrence on
which the claim or grievance is based." (Emphasis ours.)
It is the Carrier's position that the language "the employe involved" re-
quires the naming of the indivduals for whom a claim is presented, and,
therefore, contends your Board is without authority to consider that part of
the instant claim for "all other employes of the Norfolk and Western Railway
Company adversely affected."
The use of ACL telegraphers in the N&W-ACL joint interlocking station
at Petersburg was in accordance with the 11-3-54 Agreement; therefore,
Article I was not violated by the Carrier as alleged by the Employes. The
Carrier respectfully requests dismissal of the claim.
OPINION OF BOARD:
This claim is based on the establishment of the
joint interlocking plant at Petersburg, Virginia, on November 17, 1954. The
plant was placed in operation pursuant to a Joint Agreement, dated November
9388-26
62
3, 1954, entered into by the parties and the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Company. The Carrier contends that the Joint Agreement is a
complete
defense to the claim.
The record shows that ever since operation of a joint interlocking plant
at the location mentioned was proposed, the parties have been in dispute as to
whether or not such plant would constitute a "coordination" within the
meaning of the Washington Job Protection Agreement, dated May 21, 1936,
to which they were signatories. They have embodied reference to that dispute
in the Joint Agreement to the extent that Section 6 thereof states:
"This Memorandum Agreement is without prejudice to the position of the Order of Railroad Telegraphers as stated in their letter
of October 16, 1953, addressed to Mr. H. C. Wyatt, Vice-President
and General Manager, Norfolk and Western Railway Company,
Roanoke, Virginia, and Mr. W. S. Baker, Assistant Vice-President,
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, Wilmington, North Carolina,
reading in part as follows:
`During conference on October 13, 1953, we stated that our
position as outlined in the letters written by General Chairmen Wilson and Keller, dated
April 1 and 6, 1953, respectively, remained unchanged and that we could not now
agree that what is proposed, constituted a coordination as
contemplated by the `Washington Agreement' referred to
above'."
The Washington Job Protection Agreement defines the term "coordination" and in Section 13 states:
"In the event that any dispute or controversy arises (except as
defined in Section 11) in connection with a particular coordination,
including an interpretation, application or enforcement of any of the
provisions of this agreement (or of the agreement entered into between the carriers and the representatives of the mployes relating to
said coordination as contemplated by this agreement) which is not
composed by the parties thereto within thirty days after same arises,
it may be referred by either party for consideration and determination
to a Committee which is hereby established, composed in the first
instance of the signatories to this agreement. Each party to this
agreement may name such persons from time to time as each party
desires to serve on such Committee as its representatives in substitution for such original members. Should the Committee be unable to
agree, it shall select a neutral referee and in the event it is unable
to agree within 10 days upon the selection of said referee, then the
members on either side may request the National Mediation Board
to appoint a referee. The case shall again be considered by the Committee and the referee and the decision of the referee shall be final
and conclusive. * * "
We must respect the machinery accepted by the parties for the resolution of a dispute concerning "coordination". Such a dispute has arisen in
connection with the establishment of the joint interlocking plant and is
referred to in the Joint Agreement which concerns operation of the plant.
Considerations of comity suggest that we should refrain from
action under
such circumstances. See Awards 8039, 6302. The claim should be dismissed.
9338-27
63
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;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the claim should be dismissed in accordance with the Opinion.
AWARD
Claim dismissed in accordance with the Opinion and Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 2nd day of May 1960.