NATIONAL
RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
William H. Coburn, Referee
PARTIES TO
DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES
CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood that:
(1) The Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it assigned Mr. C. E. Wallace, who was relieving the regular assigned
Apprentice Foreman on the Millen, Georgia Section during the week
of February 23, 1958, to perform the work and duties of Section
Foreman on February 25, 26, and 28, 1958, and was not paid Section
Foreman's rate of pay.
(2) Apprentice Foreman C. E. Wallace be paid Section Foreman's pay for February 25 through February 28, 1958, at the rate
applicable to the position set forth in Bulletin No. 1224 establishing
position of Section Foreman at
Millen, Georgia
.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The claimant, who has established and holds seniority as an Apprentice Foreman, but who was working
in another classification, was assigned to relieve the regularly assigned Apprentice Foreman on the Millen, Georgia, Section during the week of February
23,1958.
During that week, the claimant was assigned to and performed duties attached to the position of Section Foreman on the aforementioned section, for
which he was compensated at the Apprentice Foreman's rate of pay.
The dates and the section foreman's duties performed by the claimant
are as follows:
On February 25, 1958, the claimant, accompanied by one section
laborer, patrolled track (motored) from Millen to Dover, Georgia, and
return, a total of forty-four miles,
inspecting track,
surfacing low
joints in track and replacing missing track bolts.
On February 26, 1958, the claimant, accompanied by two section
laborers, patrolled track (motored) from Millen, Georgia to Mile Post
94, Augusta District, and return, a total of thirty miles, jolting and
surfacing track and replacing missing track bolts.
(9521
12418-19
970
In Third Division Award No.
6828, Referee Messmore, it was held:
"The authority of this Division is limited to interpreting and applying the rules agreed upon by the parties. If inequities among
employes arise by reason thereof, this Division is without authority
to correct them as it has not been given equity powers. In other
words, we cannot make a rule or modify existing rules to prevent inequities thus created. Renegotiation thereof is the manner provided
by the Railway Labor Act, which is the proper source of authority
for that purpose. See Award 5703. See, also, Awards 4439, 5864, 2491.
'The burden of establishing facts sufficient to require or permit
the allowance of a claim is upon him who seeks its allowance.' See
Awards 3523, 6018, 5040, 5976."
And there are many more identical awards on this point such as Third
Division Nos. 7870, 7718, 7653, 7440, 7422, 7153, 7166, 7101, 7093, 7068, etc.
The Board having heretofore recognized the limitations placed upon it by
law, and that it does not have authority to grant new rules, and will therefore not attempt to further restrict Carrier's rights, there is ample reason
for a denial award for this sole reason, if for no other.
CONCLUSION
It having been proven that-
(1) The claim is barred under Article V of the November 5, 1954
Agreement;
(2) The Carrier did not violate the effective Maintenance of Way
Agreement during February, 1958, in having Apprentice Foreman
Brinson and laborer(s) perform their customary work of inspecting and making minor repairs to track on their Section No. 2, on
Carrier's Savannah Division;
(3) The management has not negotiated away its inherent right to
determine its supervisory requirements and thus determine when
and what amount of supervision is needed in the utilization of
laborers or others to perform their day to day work, as in this
case;
(4) Performance of the work in the manner indicated was in conformity with past, accepted and agreed-to practices, all of which
is proven by probative evidence;
(5) The Board is without authority to grant the new rule here demanded, and has so recognized in numerous prior awards;
(6) Claim is clearly not supported by the Agreement in evidence;
the Board cannot do other than make a denial award.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
.
OPINION OF BOARD: What was said in Award No. 12417 also applies
12418-20
971
This claim, therefore, will also be dismissed for failure to comply with
the time limit requirements of the Agreement of November 5, 1954, specifically
paragraph 1, (c) thereof.
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 claim is barred under the Agreement of November 5, 1954.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at
Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of April 1964.