NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
Michael J. Stack, Jr., Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the
Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Southern Railway, that:
1. Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when it required M. D. McNeely, regularly assigned relief Telegrapher-Leverman, to suspend work during the regular hours on his assigned position Floyd Street Tower, Louisville, Kentucky, January 26 and 27,
1957, and work the third shift Telegrapher-Leverman position Floyd
Street Tower, Louisville, Kentucky.
2. Carrier shall compensate M. D. McNeely the difference between the pro rata rate he was paid and the time and one-half rate
of pay to which he was entitled, January 26 and 27, 1957, when he
was required to work the third shift position outside his regular
assigned hours at Floyd Street, Louisville, Kentucky.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Claimant M. D. McNeely is
the regular assigned relief telegrapher-leverman at Floyd Street Tower, Louisville, Kentucky. His relief assignment with assigned hours is programmed as
follows:
First shift Saturday and Sunday 7:00 A. M. to 3:00 P. M.
Second shift Monday and Tuesday 3:00 P. M. to 11:00 P. M.
Third shift Wednesday 11:00 P. M. to 7:00 A. M.
Assigned rest days Thursday and Friday
Mr. R. A. Chapman is the regular assigned third shift telegrapher-leverman at Floyd Street Tower, Louisville, Kentucky. His assigned work week
begins on Thursday with rest days of Tuesday and Wednesday. His assigned
hours are 11:00 P. M. to 7:00 A. M.
[7271
12039-14
740
an exception to the general rules in Article III and VII. No inequity
results in such an application. The claimant lost no time, and was paid
at the higher rate applicable to the two positions on which he
worked * * *.' We have heretofore set out Award X, Section 2-a referred to in the above award. See Awards 6768, 2511, 3132.
We conclude, from the record in its entirety and the awards
herein cited or referred to, that the Carrier did not violate the Agreement, and the claim should be denied."
The principle is firmly established that when interpreting a contract, all
provisions contained within its four corners must be considered and each
rule considered in the light of the other. This principle has not only been
recognized by the Board in many cases, but in the awards above referred to.
When this principle is followed and the various provisions of the Agreement
in evidence considered in the light of prior Board awards, no conclusion can
be reached but that the instant claim is without any basis and is unsupported
by the Agreement and should, therefore, be denied.
CONCLUSION
Carrier has proven that:
(a) The effective Telegraphers' Agreement was not violated as
alleged, and the monetary demand is not supported by any provision
contained within its four corners.
(b) By utilizing Telegrapher-Leverman McNeely on the 11:00
P. M. to 7:00 A. M. shift rather than the 7:00 A. M. to 3:00 P. M.,
shift on January 26 and 27, 1957 in the emergency which existed was
in accordance with the past and accepted practice under the Agreement in evidence, all of which is fully supported by affidavits attached hereto and made a part hereof.
(c) Claims identical in principle have heretofore been denied by
the Board.
Claim being without any basis, the Board cannot do other than make a
denial award.
All evidence here presented has heretofore been made known to employe
representatives.
Carrier, not having seen the ORT's submission, reserves the right after
doing so to make response thereto.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
This case is the same in all material respects as
in Docket No. TE-10302, Award No. 11970. We adopt the opinion therein as
determinative of the issues in this case.
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:
12039-15
741
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
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 19th day of December 1963.