NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
Frank J. Dugan, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
THE TEXAS & PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of The
Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Texas & Pacific Railway, that:
1. The work and responsibilities of operating two teletype machines in the Texarkana, Texas-Arkansas Yard Office since May 1.
1939, belongs exclusively to employes under the prevailing Telegraphers' Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Article 1 (a)
of said Agreement and the Memorandum of Agreement between the
parties supplemental thereto dated April 28, 1939, and effective
May 1, 1939;
2. The Carrier violated Article 1 (a) and other rules of the
prevailing Telegraphers' Agreement, and the Memorandum of Agreement May 1, 1939, when, commencing on August 1, 1948 it unilaterally assigned employes not under the Telegraphers' Agreement
to regularly operate the two teletype machines installed in the Texarkana Yard Office since May 1, 1939;
3. The Carrier shall be required to establish the necessary number of positions to perform the operation of these two additional teletype machines and fill the positions in accordance with the governing
rules of the Telegraphers' Agreement; and
4. The senior qualified employes under the Telegraphers' Agreement who were and have been available commencing August 1, 1948,
- shall be paid a day's pay for each day's work thus lost to them until
this work is regularly assigned to employes under the Telegraphers'
Agreement.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
There is an agreement in effect
between the parties with effective date of May 15, 1950.
In 1939 during a mediation negotiation concerning the jurisdiction of
work on mechanical telegraph transmission and reception appliances, two
agreements were signed by the parties. Surveying the various locations,
[394]
19491-21
414
There are other reasons why this "claim" is without merit, but we have
conclusively demonstrated that fact beyond the shadow of any doubt. We have
also shown that it should, in the first place, be dismissed with prejudice, for
the reasons shown in 1, 2, 3 and 4 above.
The Carrier requests the Board to dismiss the claim with prejudice, or in
the alternative, to deny it.
It is affirmed that all data submitted herein in support of the Carrier's
position has heretofore been presented to the Organization and is hereby made
a part of the question in dispute.
OPINION OF BOARD:
The Organization and the Carrier signed the
following Memorandum of Agreement:
"It is agreed and understood that the Teletype, or mechanical
transmission and reception machines now located in the yard office
at Texarkana are excepted from the agreement effective May 1,
1939, and the provisions of that agreement as set up in the Scope
Rule does not apply at this location.
"Dated at Dallas, Texas, this 28th day of April, 1939.
"FOR THE TEXAS AND PACIFIC RAILWAY CO.
../s/ A. J. Chester
General Manager
"FOR ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
"yal W.
n
Canafax
General Chairman"
At the time this Agreement was signed there were two teletype machines
at Texarkana. About August 1, 1948 two additional machines were installed.
The Organization complained that this violated the Agreement. The Carrier
denied the claim relying on the Memorandum Agreement particularly that
portion saying "and the provisions of that agreement as set up in the Scope
Rule does not apply at this location."
The Organization contends the Memorandum of Agreement was limited
to the first two machines. But this contention would require the Board to stop
at the words effective May 1, 1939 and to excise the words "and the provisions
of that agreement as set up in the Scope Rule does not apply at this location."
This the Board does not have authority to do for it plainly authorizes the Carrier to install the additional machines.
In view of the disposition of this claim the procedural objections of the
Carrier are not discussed.
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:
19491-22
41.5
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 Agreement was not violated.
AWARD
The Claim is denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of March 1962.