NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Thomas C. Begley, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
AMERICAN TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSOCIATION
CHICAGO & ILLINOIS MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the American Train Dispatchers
Association that:
(a) The Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company, hereinafter referred to as the Carrier violated the currently effective
Agreement between the parties to this dispute, particularly Article
II, Section 10-b, when on Saturday, April 27 and Sunday, April 28,
1957 it failed and refused to use unassigned Train Dispatcher 7. E.
Heaberlin to perform extra work in its Springfield, Illinois train
dispatching office.
(b) Carrier shall now compensate Train Dispatcher S. E.
Heaberlin the difference between what he earned as telegrapher
and what he would have earned as trick train dispatcher had he
been used to perform service as such on Saturday, April 27 and
Sunday, April 28, 1957.
E33IPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
There is in effect an Agreement between the parties, effective August 16, 1946, on file with your Honorable Board and by this reference is made a part of this submission as though
it were fully set out herein.
Article H, Section 10-b, Section 14, Article IV, Section 1-b, Section 7
and Section 8, which are particularly pertinent to the instant claim are quoted
here for ready reference.
"Section 10-b. Temporary vacancies of not more than seven (7)
calendar days' duration may be filled in the following order of precedence: (1) as a fifth day of service for any available relief train
dispatcher holding a four-day assignment, (2) by the senior qualified and available unassigned train dispatcher who will not thereby
have claim to work more than five (5) consecutive days, or (3) as
provided hereinafter for a temporary vacancy of more than seven
(7) calendar days. A temporary vacancy known to be of more than
seven (7) calendar days' duration will be made known to the train
dispatchers in the office and will be filled by permitting regularly
assigned train dispatchers to place themselves, in accordance with
[4431
10413-9
451
Heaberlin is a junior unassigned train dispatcher and the rules and
long established past practices thereunder have not been revised to
provide such application, Heaberlin can have no claim to the regular relief service here involved of less than four days, which was
performed by a senior available employe. Therefore, there is neither
equity, practice, or rule to support his claim.
We, therefore, respectfully request that the claims of the employes in
this case be denied.
All data in support of the carrier's position in connection with this claim
has been presented to the duly authorized representative of the employes,
and is made a part of the particular question in dispute.
OPINION OF BOARD:
Senior unassigned Train Dispatcher Biggart
performed service on a temporary vacancy, working Wednesday April 17,
Thursday April 18, Friday April 19, Monday April 22, through Sunday April
28, 1957, a total of seven consecutive days.
The Employes state that the Carrier violated Article II, Section 10 (b)
when it permitted Biggart to perform service on a temporary vacancy for
more than five (5) days.
The Carrier states that Biggart was properly assigned under Article IV
Section 7 of the Agreement.
The Board finds that an unassigned train dispatcher cannot work a temporary vacancy for more than five (5) days under Article II Section 10 lb),
the pertinent part of which reads as follows:
"Temporary vacancies of not more than seven (7) calendar days'
duration may be filled in the following order of precedence:
(1) As a fifth day of service for any available relief
train dispatcher holding a four-day assignment, (2) by the
senior qualified and available unassigned train dispatcher
who will not thereby have claim to work more than five (5)
consecutive days. * * * "
Biggart had worked the temporary vacancy for five (5) days, therefore
be was not available to work the two (2) rest days of this position.
This claim will be sustained.
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
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
That the Carrier violated the Agreement.
10¢13-19
452
AWARD
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of March 1962.