"MO-365
Award No. 14684
Docket No. MW-15608
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
John H. Dorsey, 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 Agreement when it laid off Tinner
W. A. Holland at the close of work, Monday, August 5, 1963, thereby
depriving Mr. Holland of pay for August 6, 7, 8 and 9, 1963. (System
Case No. 15-36-129-Carrier's File MW-3114.)
(2) The Carrier again violated the Agreement when it laid off
Cook E. Henderson and Track Laborers L. Owens, Jr., J. Trimble,
P. Douglas, J. H. Patrick and O. J. Lindsey at the close of work, Monday, September 16, 1963, thereby depriving said employes of pay for
September 17, 18, 19 and 2'.0, 1963. (System Case No. 3-5-26-138Carrier's File MW-3122.)
(3) The Carrier again violated the Agreement when it laid off
Track Laborers E. M. Walker and H. Lewis at the close of work, Monday, September 30, 1963, thereby depriving said employes of pay for
October 1, 2, 3, and 4, 1963. (System Case No. 35-27-140-Carrier's
File MW-3123.)
(4) Each claimant named in Parts (1), (2) and (3) of this claim
be allowed thirty-two (32) hours' pay at his respective straight time
rate because of the violations referred to in Parts (1), (2) and (3) of
this claim.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Claimant W. A. Holland, Ident.
No. 38739, has established and holds seniority as tinner and was assigned
as such until his position was "abolished" effective with the close of work,
Monday, August 5, 1963 in accordance with Chief Engineer-Maintenance
W. E. Chapman's letter of July 29, 1963 to Division Engineer J. G. Watwood.
Claimant E, Henderson, Ident. No. 36963, has established and holds seniority as cook
and was assigned as such on Extra Gang No. 2, Columbus Division. Claimants L. Owens, Jr., Ident. No. 65953, J. Trimble, Ident. No. 88814,
P. Douglas, Ident. No. 22832, J. H. Patrick, Ident. No. 67070, and O. J. Lindsey,
Of course the foregoing does not change or affect the language
contained in Article VI of the November 5, 1954 Agreement reading
as follows:
The foregoing agreement was
amended by the "Non-Ops National Agreement" of June 5, 1962, to the extent set forth in
"ARTICLE 111.
ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
Effective July 16, 1962, existing rules providing that advance
notice of less than five (5) working days be given before the abolishment of a position or reduction in force are hereby revised so as to
require not less than five (5) working days' advance notice. With
respect to employes working on regularly established positions where
existing rules do, not require advance notice before such position is
abolished, not less than five (5) working days' advance notice shall be
given before such positions are abolished. The provisions of Article
VI of the August 21, 1954 Agreement shall constitute an exception to
the foregoing requirements of this Article."
GENERAL
It is a fact that in each of the three claims, the claimants involved were
hourly paid employes. It is an undisputed fact that in each instance, proper
advance notice was given to claimants to abolish their unneeded positions. It
is a further fact that Carrier has the unquestioned right to abolish the jobs in
question, and upon their abolishment, they ceased to, exist. The claimants'
positions were abolished, and when so abolished, everything pertaining to the
positions was abolished with them. There is no rule to support the claims for
unearned pay for these claimants after their unneeded jobs were abolished or
eliminated.
The principal correspondence concerning these three claims is attached
hereto. Carrier's Exhibits No. 1 through No. 1-G refers to CLAIM No. 1.
Carrier's Exhibits No. 2 through No. 2-F refers to CLAIM No. 2. Carrier's
Exhibits No. 3 through No. 3-F refers to CLAIM No. 3.
The Brotherhood has failed in all handlings on the property to cite a rule,
interpretation or practice which gives them what they are here demanding.
Not knowing of any rule, interpretation or practice that has been violated by
the Carrier, the demands of the Brotherhood have been denied at each and
every stage of handling as evidenced by Carrier's Exhibits attached hereto.
The claim has no semblance of merit.
The rules and working conditions agreement between the Carrier and its
employes represented by the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes is
effective September 1, 1949, as amended. Copies are on file with your Board,
and the agreement, as amended, is hereby made a part of this dispute as though
reproduced herein word for word.
OPINION OF BOARD:
This Claim involves the same parties, the same
Agreement, identical rules, identical principles and, except for dates and
14684 7
identity of claimants, identical factual situations as in Awards Nos. 14393 and
14631. For reasons stated in those Awards we will deny the Claim.
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 Carrier did not violate the Agreement.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of July 1966.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
14684 8