PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES

THE CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY

- CHESAPEAKE DISTRICT -


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:







1. At the Carrier's Charlottesville, Virginia, Passenger Station, at some time prior to May 1958, Porter positions were assigned as follows:

Posiriou Hours of
Occupant Number Assignment Meal Period Rest Days
Lawrence Hart.- C-5 edt0 A.M.400 PM. Rd. 33 SaluMay.Sundey
Silos Walker C.14 12 Mid.-8:00 A.M. Rula 33 Friday-Saturday
J. N. Harris C-44 12:01 AM 8~1 A.M. Rule 33 Sunday M d.,
Chula. Bradley C-129 1120 AM.a20 P.M. 320 PM 420 PM. SundayMaaday
W. T. We.6inglnu C-134 7:30 P.M.-4:30 A.M. 11:30 P.M. 12:30 A.M. Tuseday-Wednesday
M. C. Bryant C-89 7:30 P.M. 4:30 A.M. 11:30 P.M. 12:30 A.M.Tneaday.Wedna.day

Two regular relief assignments were assigned to relieve the above positions as follows:








11826-17 635



This award made it plain that in cases where, as here, crew dispatchers are on a three consecutive shift basis, it does not follow that porters are also on a three consecutive shift basis, or that the three shift provision applies to all positions at a station, town, or terminal as the Employes contend.


The assignment of the two porter positions in question conforms in all respects to Rule 13 (c), and there has been no breach of any of the rules of the controlling agreement, in line with which the claim should be denied in its entirety.


All data contained in this presentation have been discussed in conference or by correspondence with the employe representatives.


OPINION OF BOARD: This case concerns the same parties and the same Rule-13 (b)-as in Award 11825, although the factual situation is different.


In March 1958 Porter positions at Charlottesville, Virginia were assigned as follows:










Boon thereafter revisions were made in this schedule so that ultimately, on August 22, the porter assignments were as follows:










Positions C-89 and C-134, as may be noted, end between the hours of Midnight and 6:00 A.M., although Rule 13(b) declares that "where three consecutive shifts are worked covering the 24-hour period, no shift will have a starting or ending time after 12 Midnight and before 6:00 A. M." The question here is whether 13 (b) applies in this situation.

11826-IS 636

It is clear that Carrier has provided around-the-clock porter service. Positions C-14 and C-44, between them, cover the hours 11:00 P. M. to 8:00 A. M. Positions C-5 and C-129, between them, cover the period 8:00 A. M. to 8:20 P. M. Positions C-a9 and C-134 cover the hours 7:30 P. M. to 11:00 P. M. (and more). Thus, no period in the 24-hour cycle is uncovered.


However, 13(b) is applicable only "where three consecutive shifts are worked covering the 24-hour period." Leaving aside the disputed assignments C-89 and C-134 (both from 7:30 P. M. to 4:30 A. M.) we find four positions, each with a different shift:








Whichever way these shifts are combined, there are some hours within the 24 which are unassigned. At the minimum there is a 2 hour and 40 minute hiatus between 8:20 P. M. and 11:00 P. M.


Even if one of the disputed shifts is added, it is still impossible to combine any three shifts so that they completely cover the 24-hour period.


Award 3821, although it had reference to three shifts with a four hour hiatus between the end of the third and beginning of the first, is not in point since the Board, there, was concerned with the interpretation of "continuous shifts" in a different paragraph of the rule. No claim regarding the "no shift" rule was involved. In none of the other cited cases can we find a situation which duplicates this; i.e. where a "no shift" rule has been invoked in the absence of the basic condition that there be three consecutive shifts covering the 24-hour period.


In the companion case (Award 11825) we have dealt with the question of whether the presence of a three consecutive shift assignment in another work group (Crew Dispatchers) requires the application of 13 (b) to unrelated work. Portering, clearly, is even less like Crew Dispatching work than is the task of Ticket Clerk. For the reasons assigned in Award 11825, Petitioner's similar intentions in this case are rejected.




FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:




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

11826-i9 637












Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of October 1963.