THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
5(a) On September 8, 1958, it required or permitted a clerk at Okolona, Mississippi and the Ticket Agent at Mobile, Alabama, to transmit and receive messages by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate W. L. Adams, senior idle telegrapher, in the amount of a day's pay.
6(a) On September 10, 1958, it required or permitted a clerk in the General Offices at Mobile, Alabama and a clerk at Okolona, Mississippi, neither covered by the agreement, to transmit and receive messages by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate J. A. Pilkinton, senior idle telegrapher, in the amount of a day's pay.
7(a) On November 6, 1958, it required or permitted a Chief Clerk at Jackson, Mississippi and a Trainmaster at Okolona, Mississippi, neither covered by the agreement, to transmit and receive messages by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate the senior idle telegrapher, extra in preference, on the seniority district, in the amount of a day's pay and E. E. Sedberry, telegrapher at Okolona in the amount of a minimum call payment.
8(a) On November 15, 1958, it required or permitted a Chief Clerk at Jackson, Mississippi and a Trainmaster at Okolona, Mississippi, neither covered by the agreement, to transmit and receive messages by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate the senior idle telegrapher, extra in preference, on the seniority district, in the amount of a day's pay and E. E. Sedberry, telegrapher at Okolona, in the amount of a minimum call payment.
9(a) On November 15, 1958, it required or permitted the Chief Train Dispatcher at Murphysboro, Illinois, not covered by the agreement, to transmit a message by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate the senior idle telegrapher, extra in preference, on the seniority district, in the amount of a day's pay.
10(a) On January 29, 1959, it required or permitted a Yard Clerk at Tamms, Illinois, not covered by the agreement, to transmit a message by use of telephone to the train dispatcher at a time when the Agent-Telegrapher was off duty.
(b) Carrier shall compensate K. A. Simon, Agent-Telegrapher at Tamms, in the amount of a minimum call payment.
11(a) On November 28, 1958, it required or permitted a clerk at Okolona, Mississippi, to transmit a message to Artesia, Mississippi by use of telephone.
(b) Carrier shall compensate E. E. Sedberry, telegrapher at Okolona, in the amount of a minimum call payment. 12077-3 21
telegraphers using the telephone has by innumerable incidents been well established and is a matter of common knowledge among the negotiators of the contract. An intent to change such common and accepted practices can only be accomplished through clear and specific provisions of the agreement, which are totally absent in this case.
The claims as presented herein are totally without merit and should be denied.
OPINION OF BOARD: In this dispute 18 claims are presented by the Organization alleging that employes outside the telegraphers craft were transmitting messages reserved to them by their Scope Rule. These messages originated by phone from stations operated by the Carrier.
Claim No. 1 arose at Shubuta, Mississippi, while the agent-telegrapher was off duty. The trainmaster transmitted the "tie-up" of a work extra to the train dispatcher on the dispatcher's telephone circuit. The report made by the trainmaster relinquished the work order and established the quitting time of the crew. The claim asked for an additional payment of two hours to the Agent-telegrapher.
We are of the opinion that Claim No. 1 concerned itself with the operation of trains and was work belonging to the operator employed at the station but not on duty. See Award 10823.
We are further of the opinion that claims numbered from 2 to 18 inclusive did not violate the Agreement as their subject matter did not concern the operation of trains. See Award 11730.
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:
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 violated with respect to Claim No. 1; and there was no further violation of the Agreement.