THE NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD
RAILROAD COMPANY
Claims were initiated on behalf of Mr. Barkauskas for calls on February 2, 9, 16, 1965 and March 2, 8, 16, 23, 1965, and progressed through the prescribed channels on the property up to and including the undersigned.
Attached in exhibit form is a copy of the pertinent correspondence as follows:
Claims were denied on the property on the basis that it is a well established practice that the work of reporting the clearing to the operator in control of the block is not the exclusive work of a telegrapher.
Copy of the Agreement dated September 1, 1949, between the parties, as amended, and the National Non-Operating Agreement of August 21, 1954 are on file with this Board and are, by reference, made a part of this submission.
OPINION OF BOARD: This consolidated claim involves the same fundamental issue considered in Award 16303 but under somewhat different factual circumstances.
Claimant is the regular occupant of the 3:00 P. M. to 11:00 P. M. trick at Waterbury, Connecticut. On the dates of claim, conductors of freight trains arriving at Waterbury reported themselves clear to the operator in control of the block after the Claimant's assigned working hours. Claimant seeks compensation for a three (3) hour call on each date that conductors cleared the block at Waterbury, Connecticut outside of his assigned hours.
The record discloses that Carrier formerly maintained a tower at Waterbury, known as the Bank Street Tower, where Block Operators were employed on a continuous twenty-four hour basis. Approximately ten years prior to this dispute, the tower was closed and the particular telegrapher's position abolished. Simultaneously, the remaining duties of this abolished position were transferred to Carrier's block office and train order station, which is open seven days a week from 5:00 A. M. to 11:00 P. M. The disputed blocking service performed by conductors occurred at night while this facility of Carrier was closed.
The Scope Rule of the effective Agreement is general in nature, and Petitioner has failed to establish through competent evidence that telegraphers historically and customarily perform the disputed work to the exclusion of all other employes of Carrier under similar circumstances throughout Carrier's system.
Although the Carrier formerly employed telegraphers on a continuous basis to staff the Bank Street tower, this facility has been closed and such positions abolished for oven ten years. The record reveals no evidence that Carrier has previously assigned employes to regular duty at the present Waterbury station between 11:00 P. M. and 5:00 A. M., when the disputed work was performed by conductors. Therefore, we find Awards 7, 10 and 18 of Special Board of Adjustment No. 306 persuasive in this case. Accordingly, we will deny the claim.