(Exhibits not reproduced.)

OPINION OF BOARD: The following material and relevant facts are not in dispute:

Prior to 1953 freight shipments of the kind here involved were made by box car via fast merchandise trains that operated on passenger train schedules. Upon arrival at Los Angeles the box cars were spotted at the freight station where employes covered by the Clerks' Agreement performed the work of unloading, checking, sorting and delivering the company freight to Pacific Motor Trucking Company vans for delivery to consignees in the area.

The Pacific Motor Trucking Company (herein called "PMT"), a whollyowned subsidiary of this Carrier, is engaged in the business of the common carriage of freight by highway motor truck, and, insofar as pertinent here, handles a substantial volume of inter-city rail-billed freight shipments under contracts with the Carrier.

In 1953, Trailer-Flat Car Service (the so-called "piggy-back" service) was inaugurated on this property. It consists of hauling over-the-road trailers, or vans, on specially built railroad flat cars. PMT's participation in this service, including the movement of LCL freight between San Francisco and Los Angeles, was to place vans at shippers' door, pick them up after they were loaded, and place them on Carrier's rail flat cars at ramps provided for that purpose. Vans were then moved "piggy-back" via Carrier's rails to destination where they were unloaded and delivered to consignees by PMT equipment.

In the case before the Board, the vans loaded with Girl Scout Candy were picked up by PMT trucks and placed on Carrier's flat cars by PMT employes at San Jose, California, for delivery to consignees in the Los Angeles area the following morning. Upon arrival at Los Angeles they were removed from flat cars by PMT employes and hauled to an area adjacent to the Freight Station. At that point, the work of transferring the candy into PMT trucks for delivery to the consignees was performed by PMT employes. This is the work which the Employes allege is reserved to them under the Clerks' Agreement and which, therefore, may not properly be performed by others.

The Scope Rule of the Clerks' Agreement lists positions covered thereby but does not describe the work to be performed. Therefore, when asserting an exclusive right to perform a particular kind of work, the Employes must show by competent evidence that that work has been assigned to and performed by covered employes consistently over so long a period of time as to establish their right to continue to perform it to the exclusion of all others. (See Award 2701). And it is too well established to require citation of authority that if such showing is made then the Carrier's unilateral removal of that work from Agreement coverage and its assignment to others not so covered constitutes a violation of the Clerks' Agreement.

It is not denied that for many years prior to the inauguration of piggyback service on this property, the work of handling LCL freight at Los Angeles was assigned to and performed by covered freight station employes there. It is also clear that during this period shipments of the kind here involved were received, checked, sorted and delivered by such employes to PMT trucks for ultimate delivery to consignees in the Los Angeles area. What is sharply disputed by the parties is whether the practice was continued after the "piggy-back" operation became the established method of

transporting such shipments-the Employes argue that it was; the Carrier contends that PMT employes, rather than Clerks, handled such split delivery shipments at Los Angeles "in precisely the same manner" as was done in the instant case.

The Board finds the preponderance of the evidence of record supports the position taken by the Employes in this case. That evidence establishes the exclusive contractual right of covered employes to handle LCL freight shipments at Los Angeles on the basis of a consistent practice of long duration. That right may not properly be abrogated by a mere change in the method of transporting such shipments, (and that is all that was done here) or for reasons of operational efficiency (See Award 8751). This is not to say that PMT equipment and employes may not properly be used to load and unload PMT vans on and off Carrier's flat cars as a part of the piggy-back service at Los Angeles. What we do hold is that the handling of LCL freight or split delivery shipments there is a protected right of employes covered by the Clerks' Agreement.

Award No. 17 of S.B.A. No. 194 (St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. & Clerks), cited and relied on by Carrier is clearly not in point. There the pertinent finding upon which the denial issued was that because the LCL shipments were moved by motor truck and not by rail (although rail-billed they were in the uninterrupted custody of the trucking company from the point of receipt to the point of delivery to the consignee; that, therefore, there was no "farming out" of the intermediate handling and checking. Rather than being persuasive here, a fair reading of Award No. 17 leaves the clear impression that had the motor trucking company's custody been interrupted through shipment by rail (as was the case here) the Board there would have found a violation.

In the light of the foregoing the claim will be sustained.

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

That the parties waived oral hearing;

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.

AWARD