NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
Kieran P. O'Gallagher, 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 terms of the Agreement between the parties when on April 28, 1956, it required or permitted Conductor
Purdue, an employe not covered by the Agreement, to handle (receive, copy and deliver) Train Orders No. 724 and 725, direct from the
Train Dispatcher.
2. Carrier violated the rules of the Telegraphers' Agreement
when on May 18, 1956, it required or permitted Conductor Carter, an
employe not under the Agreement, on Train No. 56, to handle (receive,
copy and deliver) Train Order No. 731 at 11:03 P. M. at Ringgold,
Virginia, direct from the Train Dispatcher.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On April 28, 1956, Conductor
Purdue on Train No. 56 copied Orders Nos. 724 and 725 at 11:30 P. M. and
11:34 P. M. respectively, by means of a telephone located at Ringgold, Virginia,
from the dispatcher. Copies of the two orders read as follows:
Form 31
Order No. 724 Ringgold, Virginia
C&E No. 56 April 28, 1956
Order No. 722 is annulled. No. 56 Fifty Six Eng 7 hold main track
meet No. 11 Eleven Eng. 6877 at South Boston.
R.T.N.
Repeated 11:30 P. M.
Perdue No. 56 Complete 11:30 P. M.
[2661
12151-14
279
CONCLUSION
Carrier has proven that:
(a) Claims which the ORT here attempts to assert are not the
claims presented to the Carrier and handled in the usual manner as
required by the Railway Labor Act, Board Rules of Procedure, and the
effective agreement. They are, therefore, barred, and the Board has
no jurisdiction over them and should, therefore, dismiss them for
want of jurisdiction.
(b) Without prejudice to its position that the Board has no
jurisdiction over the claims which the ORT here attempts to assert,
and without waiving any of its rights under the law, the effective
agreement or Board Rules of Procedure, Carrier submits that the
effective Telegraphers' agreement has not been violated as alleged,
that the point at issue has heretofore been conceded by the ORT, that
prosecution of the claims is nothing more than an effort by the ORT
to establish new rules and working conditions by an award of the
Adjustment Board rather than by following the processes of collective
bargaining, and that, in such situation, the Board cannot sustain the
claims except by disregarding the plain, unambiguous language of the
agreement in evidence, which it has heretofore recognized that it
would not do.
(c) While claims should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the
Board has no alternative other than make a denial award in event it
assumes jurisdiction and considers the claims under agreement rules.
OPINION OF
BOARD: This case is the same in all material respects
as in Docket No. TE-9988, Award No. 12150. 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:
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 29th day of January 1964.