THIRD DIVISION

(Supplemental)




PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES UNION
 SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation-Communication Employees Union on the Soo Line Railroad Company, that:

of the days listed herein, one or more members of train crews unloaded into or loaded out of the freight houses at points listed herein, LCL freight and/or express shipments when the claimants were not on duty.



at the effective rate for the time claimed at each respective station:

 W. J. Doyle, Jr. - 1 call - February 22, 1965 at Wendell, Minnesota

J. A. Karas - 1 hour overtime - January 20, 1965 at Wyndmere, N. D. O. O. Hausken - 1 call - February 14, 1965 at Veblen, S. D.


I. M. Miller - 1 call - January 14, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller - 1 call - January 18, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller-1 call-January 21, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 1. M. Miller - 1 call - January 22, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller - 1 call - January 23, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 1. M. Miller - 1 call - January 26, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 1. M. Miller - 1 call - January 27, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller - 2 calls - February 1 and 2, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 1. M. Miller - 1 call - February 3, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller - 1 call - February 5, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.
 I. M. Miller - 1 call - January 12, 1965 at Lidgerwood, N. D.


16952 2
 J. M. Coppin - 1 call - February 23, 1965 at Fredonia, N. D. J. J. Sahli - 2 hours - February 24, 1965 at Moffit, N. D. J. J. Sahli - 1 call - February 26, 1965 at Moffit, N. D. J. J. Sahli - 1 call - March 1, 1965 at Moffit, N. D. J. J. Sahli - 1 call - March 3, 1965 at Moffit, N. D. J. A. Schauer - 1 call - February 1, 1965 at Benedict, N. D. J. A. Schauer - 1 call - February 3, 1965 at Benedict, N. D. J. A. Schauer - 1 call - February 5, 1965 at Benedict, N. D. J. A. Schauer - 1 call - February 8, 1965 at Benedict, N. D. J. A. Schauer - 1 call - February 16, 1965 at Benedict, N. D. E. F. Roehrich - 2 hours - January 26, 1965 at Wilton, N. D. E. F. Roehrich - 2 hours - January 29, 1965 at Wilton, N. D. E. F. Roehrich - 2 hours - February 5, 1965 at Wilton, N. D. L. E. Park - 1 hour - January 18, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. L. E. Park - 1 call - January 28, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. L. E. Park - 1 call - February 3, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. L. E. Park - 1 call - February 5, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. L. E. Park - 1 call - February 10, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. L. E. Park - 1~c hours -February 17, 1965 at Douglas, N. D. E. B. Janisch - 1 call - February 10, 1965 at Makoti, N. D. T. E. Lynch - 1 call - February 17, 1965 at Marshall, N. D. EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Agreement between the parties, effective July 1, 1956, as amended and supplemented, is available to your Board, and by this reference is made a part hereof. Prior to December 28, 1964, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen had an agreement rule with this Carrier, reading as follows: "RULE 4.

 All freight will be placed on station platform regardless of whatever kind it is." On December 28, 1964, the Carrier and the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen entered into an agreement which provided for full attrition in the reduction of third brakemen positions and the elimination or amending of certain rules, including Rule 4. On January 11, 1965, Superintendent Welton issued the following notice
 under File A-68:
 "S00 LINE RAILROAD COMPANY
 WESTERN DIVISION
 Office of Superintendent

                        January 11, 1965

                        A-68


16952 3

CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: For a number of years prior to January 1, 1965, trainmen were not required to deposit freight, or express shipments inside depots, freight sheds, etc. They were merely required to place such shipments on the station platform. This was true whether or not there were station forces on duty.


Late in December, 1964, an understanding was reached whereby, commencing January 1, 1965, trainmen might be required to place such shipments within the door of the freight house or heated portion of the depot at such times as agents and other station employes were not on duty. The trainmen were also instructed to pick up such outbound shipments as might be set out by the station forces.


Upon learning of these instructions the General Chairman of the Transportation-Communication Employees' Union lodged a protest and shortly thereafter claims were initiated on behalf of individual agents employed at so-called one-man stations. These claims were progressed to the highest office of appeal on the property, where they were denied.


In the handling of these claims it was agreed between the parties that while some 69 one-man agencies were involved in this dispute, only the first group of claims would be submitted to the Board, with the understanding that Carrier in its submission might make reference to the number of stations involved and the economies to be realized through the handling complained of.


Copies of schedule agreement between the parties, effective July 1, 1956, and supplements and amendments thereto, are on file with the Board and are made a part of this record by reference.


OPINION OF BOARD: These claims are identical with those in Docket No. TE-17379, our Award No. 16951. They are sustained on the same basis.


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


    That the parties waived oral hearing;


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 Agreement was violated.


    AWARD Claims sustained.


              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of THIRD DIVISION


              ATTEST: S. H. Schulty

              Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 12th day of February 1969.

 16952 6

CARRIER MEMBERS' DISSENT TO

AWARD NO. 16951, DOCKET TE-17379,

and

AWARD NO. 16952, DOCKET TE-16255

(Referee David H. Brown)


The so-called "one-man station" doctrine or theory is not supportable by reference to any rule in the Agreement. Beyond that, throughout Carrier's property the subject work has never been performed exclusively by telegraphers.

                      R. A. DeRossett

                      C. H. Manoogian

                      J. R. Mathieu

                      C. L. Melberg

                      H. S. Tanaley


Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
 16952 7