THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Soo Line Railroad Company that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: This claim is a result of Carrier assigning employes who are not covered by the Signalmen's Agreement to perform the work of opening and closing the track circuit protecting the Gill's Landing Bridge near Waupaca, Wisconsin.
On August 23, 1962, at approximately 8:00 A. M., employes of a Bridge and Building crew disconnected the twist lock bond wires at both ends of the bridge before they turned it to the position which accommodates river traffic. When the bridge was restored to its normal position, they reconnected the bond wires.
Previously, on the infrequent occasions-not more than once or twice a year and sometimes not that often-when the bridge was opened, Signal Maintainer A. V. Gall removed plug bond wires from the rail before the bridge was turned. He installed new ones when it was turned back.
Approximately 2 years prior to the date in question, Claimant Gall installed twist lock bond wires to replace plug bonds. The instance for which claim was made was the first time that anyone other than a Signalman disconnected the track circuit and reconnected it with the twist lock bonds.
5:00 P. M., excluding lunch hour. The incident giving rise to this claim occurred during Mr. Gall's working hours.
Copy of schedule agreement between the parties to this dispute, effective February 1, 1945, together with supplements thereto are on file with the Board and are made a part of this record by reference.
OPINION OF BOARD: Prior to September 1960-when opening the Gill's Landing Bridge plug bond wires had to be removed from the track before the bridge was turned. In September 1960 Carrier installed twist lock bond wires to replace plug bonds and in November of that same years changed to a bond with a universal type disconnect.
It is the contention of the Claimant that employes in a Bridge and Building crew, not under the Signalmen's Agreement, unlocked twist lock bond wires at both ends of Gill's Landing Bridge before they turned it to a position which accommodated river traffic and, when the bridge was restored to its normal position, they reconnected the bond wires; it is Claimant's position that they performed recognized signal work of disconnecting and connecting track circuit bond wires on the bridge, thereby opening the track circuit, in violation of the agreement.
Carrier asserts that there is no disagreement between Carrier and Petitioner but that the work of installing, maintaining and repairing of bonds is signal work but urges that the reason for doing the work in the instant case was but incidental to the duties of the bridge crew in opening and coking the bridge for river traffic; that the bridge crew unscrewed the universal joint union on the bond wire and after closing the bridge reconnected the bond wire by screwing the universal union together which took but a few minutes, a very minimal amount of time as compared with the time required by the bridge crew in the performance of the rest of the project (Claimant concedes that twist lock bonds are easier and quicker to connect and disconnect than plug bonds). Carrier further maintains that to do this work no skill or training is required as there is no repairing, installing, maintenance nor inspection involved and no electrical knowledge necessary; that it could not be improperly connected nor disconnected.
Petitioner in reply, contends that the degree of skill involved in disputed work is immaterial, pointing out that, under some circumstances, employes of their craft dig ditches and do manual labor and insist that "the reason for doing the work determines to whom it belongs."
From the facts disclosed in the record, it would appear that the reason for doing the work at Gill's Landing Bridge was incidental to the opening and closing of the bridge for river traffic and, consequently, the work could be, performed by the bridge crew.
Under all the circumstances in this case, we feel that a denial award is justified.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds: