PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES



STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-5327) that:


















EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: This dispute is between the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes as the representative of the class or craft of employes in which the Claimant in this case held a position and the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the Brotherhood and the Carrier, respectively.

There is in effect a Rules Agreement, effective May 1, 1942, except as amended, covering Clerical, Other Office, Station and Storehouse Employes between the Carrier and this Brotherhood which the Carrier has filed with


13645-17 204

To grant the claim in this case would require the Board to disregard the Agreement between the parties and impose upon the Carrier conditions of employment and obligations with reference thereto not agreed upon by the parties to the Agreement. The Board has no jurisdiction or authority to take any such action.




The Carrier has shown that the actions here complained of did not violate the Rules Agreement, and that the Employes have presented no valid evidence to the contrary.


Therefore, the Carrier respectfully requests your Honorable Board to deny the Employes' claim in its entirety.




OPINION OF BOARD: On and prior to April 28, 1961, the force at Ravenna Station consisted of Agent Blumenstiel, whose position was not covered by the Clerks' Agreement, and Claimant Martin. The Claimant occupied clerical position F-313, which was covered by the Clerks' Agreement. This position was abolished effective with the close of business on Friday, April 28, 1961. Beginning Monday, May 1, 1961. the remaining work of the position was assigned to and was performed by the Agent. The confronting claim contends that Carrier violated the Clerks' Agreement by abolishing clerical position F-313 and assigning the remaining work to the Agent. Carrier responds that the disputed action was fully in accord with Rule 3-C-2 (a) of the Agreement.









Since no other clerical position remained "in existence at the location where the work of the abolished position is to be performed" (paragraph (1) of the foregoing rule), it is apparent that the pertinent language appears in above-quoted paragraph (2). In accordance with said paragraph, the question thus becomes whether the remaining work of the abolished position

13641--13 205

that was assigned to the Agent amounted to less than 4 hours' work per day, and whether said work was incidental to the Agent's duties.


We are satisfied from the evidence presented that the remaining work of the abolished clerical position amounted to less than 4 hours' work per day. We also conclude that this work was incidental to the duties of the Agent at this station. A denial award is required.


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, 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












Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of May 1965.