STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of The Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Norfolk and Western Railway Company (Virginian Lines) that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Agreement between the parties, effective September 1, 1945, as amended and supplemented, is available to your Board and by this reference is made a part here.
Suffolk, Virginia is a station on the Norfolk Division. At this station there is a position of Telegrapher-Clerk with assigned hours 8:00 A. M. to 5:00 P. M. (1 hour meal period), assigned rest days Saturday and Sunday. Prior to December 1, 1959, there were two shifts at this station providing communication service over a period of 16 hours each day. The second shift was abolished.
On Thursday, May 12, 1960, shortly after 6:00 P. M., Conducor E. W. Estes, in charge of Work Extra 635, used the telephone at Suffolk to OS his train, advise the Dispatcher when he went on duty at that date and to receive a "call" for duty on the following day. He reported to the Train Dispatcher that his train arrived at Suffolk and was in the clear of the main track at 5:50 P. M., he reported to the Train Dispatcher that his crew went on duty at 4:00 A.M., May 12, and received from the Train Dispatcher a notice or call to go on duty at 6:00 A. M., on May 13.
Claim was filed and handled up to and including the highest designated officer of the Carrier and has been declined. Correspondence reflecting this handling on the property is attached hereto as ORT Exhibits No. 1 through 8.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: The work here involved is reserved to employes holding seniority under the Telegraphers' Agreement.
changed between Conductor Estes and Dispatcher Matthews on this occasion was of a nature that could be held to be communication work in controlling the movement of trains. Similar circumstances were involved in Award No. 58, Docket No. 58, Special Board of Adjustment No. 305, in which case the STATEMENT OF CLAIM reads in pertinent part as follows:
In denying the claim involved in that case, Special Board of Adjustment No. 305 held that:
Third Division Awards 7825 and 9953 also involved claims based upon similar circumstances which were denied by your Board.
The Carrier has shown that the basis for the claim submitted to your Board is not the same as that handled on the property; that the conductor did not report a part of his work report to the dispatcher as alleged by the Employes during the handling of the claim on the property; that the conductor did not "OS" his train and transmit other reports as alleged by the Employes in submitting this case to your Board; that it has been the custom, tradition and practice for as many as 48 years for conductors to do what was done by the conductor involved in this case and therefore the work on which the claim is based is not work reserved exclusively to telegraphers by custom, tradition or historical practice. Therefore, the Carrier submits it has shown that what Conductor Estes did in this case did not constitute a violation of the Telegraphers' Agreement and the claim is without merit.
All material used in this submission was presented to or was known by the Employes while this claim was being progressed on the property.
OPINION OF BOARD: The claim submitted to the Board alleges that the Carrier required or permitted a train conductor to "OS" his train and transmit other reports to the train dispatcher.
The Carrier contends that this is a fatal variance from the claim that was filed and handled on the property, which was to the effect that the Carrier required or permitted the conductor to report part of his work report to the dispatcher. 12124-11 9902