NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
Eugene Russell, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
JOINT COUNCIL OF DINING CAR EMPLOYEES
LOCAL 848
CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of Joint Council Dining Car Employes,
Local 848 on the property of the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad
Company, for and on behalf of W. Kyles, D. Ward, J. D. Robinson, B. T. Watkins, and all other employes similarly situated, that claimants be paid the difference between what they are now receiving on Trains 1 and 10 and the Chef
Cook's rate of pay in accordance with Rule 28(d) of the existing agreement.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Under date of July 10, 1959,
Employes filed the following claim:
"July 10, 1959
"Mr. H. G. Mott
Supervisor Crew Personnel
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RR Co.
1447 So. Canal Street
Chicago 7, Illinois
"Dear Sir:
"Accept this as a time and money claim in behalf of the following
employes: W. Kyles, D. Ward, J. D. Robinson, B. T. Watkins and
other similarly situated.
"We request that these employes be paid in accordance with Rule
28(d) of the existing agreement. We further request that they be paid
retroactive, due to the violation of this agreement and that they be
paid the difference between what they are now receiving on Trains
1-10, dining car commonly known as the Chuck Wagon, and what they
would have received as chef cook under the provisions of this rule.
"We further request that this violation be discontinued, and the
Carrier bulletin the jobs in question as chef cook jobs in accordance
with Rule 28(d) of the existing agreement.
"Very truly yours,
"Cecil L. Patrick
Business Agent, Local 848
"CLP:dlw
[9271
10583-11
937
new dinette cars, just as it had always been applied on the old dinette cars in
the past.
SUMMATION
In view of the evidence submitted herein, the Board can only conclude
that-
1. Chuck Wagon cars 253 and 254 involved in this dispute are
not "dining cars". For that reason, Paragraph (d) of Rule 28 is not
applicable to this equipment.
2. Chuck Wagon cars 253 and 254 are actually "dinette cars",
and this is proved by-
A. The physical characteristics of cars 253 and 254 which
are markedly different from full size dining cars, and
similar to dinette cars Silver Beam and Silver Bell which
they replaced.
B. The type of food service offered as evidenced by the
Chuck Wagon menus, which is a short order service,
similar to that offered on the old dinette cars, Silver
Beam and Silver Bell. It is a much less complete food
service than that offered on a "dining car".
C. The number of meals served and meal revenue, particularly the average revenue per meal served on the
Chuck Wagon cars, prove that the passengers use it for
short order service of the type usually found on dinette
cars.
D. The personnel employed in the kitchen of the Chuck
Wagon cars, where the consist is much smaller than the
dining cars.
E. The practice on this property in other cases of applying
coach cafe cook rates of pay to the employe in the kitchen
of a small food serving car of this type.
The Section 6 notice served by the Organization under date
of October 17, 1956 (Carrier's Exhibit No. 5), and subsequent negotiations held on that notice, constitute an admission by the employes that
the present agreement does not provide for any greater rate of pay
for the Chuck Wagon cooks than is now being applied to them.
4. The rate of pay specified in Rule 2 of the agreement under the
heading "Dinette Cook-1-10" is being properly applied to the cooks on
Chuck Wagon cars 253 and 254.
In view of the above and foregoing, this claim must be denied.
* * * * *
All data herein and herewith submitted have been previously submitted
to the employes.
* * * * *
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
From a study of this record and previous awards
this Board must agree with the contention of the Carrier that Rule 28(d) of
the Agreement has not been violated since it is not applicable in this case for
10583-12
(93g
the reason that the cars involved in this claim are, not Dining Cars as specified
in the Agreement but are, under the facts in this record, actually "dinette cars".
This conclusion is based on the uncontradicted facts as follows:
"A. The physical characteristics of cars 253 and 254 which are
markedly different from full size dining cars, and similar to
dinette cars Silver Beam and Silver Bell which they replaced.
B. The type of food service offered as evidenced by the Chuck
Wagon menus, which is a short order service, similar to that
offered on the old dinette cars, Silver Beam and Silver Bell. It
is a much less complete food service than that offered on a
`dining car'.
C. The number of meals served and meal revenue, particularly the
average revenue per meal served on the Chuck Wagon cars,
prove that the passengers use it for short order service of the
type usually found on dinette cars.
D. The personnel employed in the kitchen of the Chuck Wagon cars,
where the consist is much smaller than the dining cars.
E. The practice on this property in other cases of applying coach
cafe cook rates of pay to the employe in the kitchen of a small
food serving car of this type."
The rate of pay specified in Rule 2 of the Agreement under the heading
"Dinette Cook-1-10" is being properly applied to the Cooks of Chuck Wagon
Cars 253 and 254.
Award No. 7859 cited by the Organization is not applicable in this case.
On the other hand Awards No. 5964, 6247 and 6280 support this view.
Based on the facts in this case we find no basis for a sustaining award.
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 did not violate the Agreement.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H.
Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at
Chicago, Illinois this 3rd day of May 19622.