NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
Ross Hutchins, 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 Agreement, when on the 10th day of
December, 1959, it caused, required or permitted M. S. Poore, a train
service employe, not covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement, to
handle (receive, copy or deliver) Train Order No. 164 at Coster,
Tennessee, to be delivered to Engine 2249 at Lake City, Tennessee,
a station approximately 29 miles west of Coster. Agent-Telegrapher
Williams was ready and available to perform this work but was not
called.
2. Carrier shall compensate R. R. Williams, Agent-Telegrapher,
Lake City, Tennessee, for one call under Rule 10, at the rate of one
and one-half times the pro rata rate of $2.47. Total $9.88.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The following diagram is given
to show the general area of the occurrence of this violation:
[826]
13341-11
836
'Moreover, all in-care-of train orders are received by train crews at one
point for execution at another point. When such orders are copied and delivered
by an operator, the "handling" under Rule 31 has been fully accomplished.
The rule would be meaningless if it required, as the employes are here contending, that operators would "handle" the same orders twice-first, at a telegraph office where they are received from the operator by the train crew and
again at the point where they are to be later executed. It was for this reason
that carrier has called the Board's attention to the fact that Rule 31 imposes
no restrictions whatsoever on the issuance of train orders by dispatchers in
accordance with carrier's Operating Rules.
Carrier has shown that no work of handling orders, belonging to operators
under Rule 31, was performed at Lake City on the night in question, that such
work was performed by the operator on duty at Coster, and that there was
no violation of the agreement. For the reasons set forth herein, carrier
respectfully requests that the claim be denied.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
Train Order No. 164 was issued as follows:
"FORM 19 FORM 19
SOUTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM
Train Order No. 164 Date: December 10, 1959
To: C&E Eng 2278 and Eng At: Coster, Tenn.
2249 at Lake City care
of Extra 2278 West
Eng 2278 run Extra Powell to Lake City has right over second
class trains Powell to Clinton and run ahead of No. 153 one fifty
three Powell to Clinton. After Extra 2278 West arrives at Lake City
Eng 2249 run Extra Lake City to Powell.
WOC Chief Dispatcher
Made Complete Time 7:31 P. M. Lewis OPR"
This claim is filed on behalf of the Agent-Telegrapher at Lake City.
This order was delivered to the train crew at Coster and instructs the
crew to run to Lake City and return. This is a "round trip order" which
this Board has construed is permitted by Rule 31 and which does not, taken
alone, give rise to a claim at the point of the turn around. See Third Division
Award No. 10418-Sheridan; Third Division Award No. 4819-Shake.
Where the same crew continuously operates the same power units there
is no "handling" of train orders where only the train's designation changes
because of reversing directions. See Awards 4819 and 10418 of the Third
Division.
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:
13341-12
837
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, 1954;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement has not been violated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of February 1965.