SPOKANE, PORTLAND AND SEATTLE
RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-5119) that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Carrier maintains at Albany, Oregon, a Freight Office and Yard Office which are several miles apart. Immediately prior to March 1, 1960, the force consisted of the following:
Effective March 1, 1960, the position of Yard Clerk and Weighmaster No. 5 was abolished and duties thereof assigned to the Cashier at Albany Freight House. These duties included yard checking, interchange reports, demurrage, preparing switch lists, industry yard check report, including blind sidings, switching settlement statements, cars forwarded report, weekly traffic report, car orders and answering telephone. Also on March 1, 1960, the duties heretofore assigned the Cashier position, including billing, expensing and
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant W. M. Jones was Cashier at Carrier's station at Albany, Oregon, and prior to March 1, 1960, the duties of the Cashier's position included the billing of cars originating at Albany; that on March 1, 1960, the duties theretofore assigned to the Cashier's position, including billing, were assigned to similar clerical positions at Carrier's Centralized Station Accounting Headquarters at Portland and information on billing was sent to Portland on a teletype machine by Telegraphers; that the centralized method of waybilling Albany cars at Portland continued until November 30, 1960, at which time the Carrier on December 1, 1960, installed an electric typewriter at the Albany Yard Office and the billing which theretofore had been performed by the Cashier before March 1, 1960, was assigned to Telegraphers; Claimant contends that under the Scope Rule of the agreement this was Clerks' work and should have been returned to the Cashier.
No changes were made in either the clerical or telegraphic force at Albany on December 1, 1960, and no work was taken away from the Cashier. Carrier contends that this work, whether clerical or telegraphic work, was properly assigned to Telegraphers to fill out their assignments.
The case before us is not one of first impression on this particular property. The same issue presented here was raised from somewhat similar facts in Award No. 13100, involving these parties and the identical Scope Rule of the Clerks' Agreement in effect on this property on the grounds that the transfer of the remaining work to Telegraphers was proper within established exceptions to the Scope Rule of the Clerks' Agreement.
It appears to the Board that this recent decision should control the instant case under an application of the doctrine of stare decisis.
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