NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(Supplemental)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Claimants G. 'C. Munguia, L. T. Hernandez, M. Mosqueda, C. Godimes and J. Garcia are section laborers regularly assigned to Section 7 at LaVergne, Illinois. Their assigned work week extends from Monday through Friday (Saturdays and Sundays are assigned rest days).
On Sunday, December 11, 1966, the Cicero Train Dispatcher reported a broken frog on Track 2 of the LaVergne Interlocking Plant. The broken frog was within one (1) block of the claimants' assembly point and within their assigned section territory. Instead of calling the claimants, all of whom have telephones and live within three (3) and five (5) miles of their assembly point, the Carrier called and used Section Foreman McGill and six (6) extra gang laborers. Foreman McGill, whose residence is approximately two (2) miles from the claimants' assembly point, and the six (6) extra gang laborers who were camped at Clyde, approximately one (1) mile away, performed overtime service from 2:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M.
The claimants were fully qualified, available and willing to perform this overtime work if the Carrier had called them to do so.
Claim was timely and properly presented and handled by the Employes at all stages of appeal up to and including the Carrier's highest appellate officer.
The Agreement in effect between the two parties to this dispute dated September 1, 1949, together with supplements, amendments and interpretations thereto is by reference made a part of this Statement of Facts.
CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: Claimants in this case are track laborers, assigned to Section 7 with headquarters at UVergne, Illinois. Section 7 is that portion of Carrier's track extending from MP 7.50 to MP 11.50 or from the east end of Cieere Yard to a little west of Des Plaines River between Riverside and Hollywood, Illinois.
On Sunday, December 11, 1966, an assigned rest day for claimants, Carrier officials received a report of a broken rail or frog on track No. 2 in the area of the LaVergne interlocking plant. It was necessary to expedite the renewal of this frog in order to restore service on the main line at that point. Section Foreman V. E. McGill, being the closer foreman to the broken frog, was called to take six extra gang laborers which were on duty at Clyde and renew the frog along with the use of a speed swing machine. It was not possible to leave No. 2 main line track out of service without causing train delays and the broken frog created an emergency which had to be remedied as promptly as possible.
Foreman McGill and the six extra gang laborers were engaged in repairing the broken frog from 2:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M. on the claim date, or a total of 3 hours.
The instant claim was presented as an alleged violation of seniority rules of the agreement account claimants allegedly not being called in line with their seniority for work on their assigned territory. The claim was finally declined in Carrier's letter dated June 13, 1967 on the basis that the broken frog created an emergency and under emergency conditions the Carrier may assign such employes as good judgment dictates. The June 13, 1967 letter is attached hereto as Carrier's Exhibit No. 1.
The schedule of rules agreement, effective September 1, 1949, is on file with the Third Division and it, as well as amendments and interpretations thereto, are herby made a part of this submission.
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimants Munguia, Hernandez, Mosqueda, Godimes, and Garcia were section laborers regularly assigned to Section 7, at LaVergne, Illinois, with Monday through Friday their work week and Saturdays and Sundays as rest days.
On Sunday, December il, 1966, a broken frog or rail on Track 2, LaVergne Interlocking Plant, within said Section 7, was reported broken. Section Foreman McGill and six Extra Gang Laborers, located at Clyde, Illinois, were called to renew the frog. This repair work took approximately 3 hours (2:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M.) to complete.
Carrier contends that an emergency existed, thus allowing it to assign such employees as good judgment dictated.
The Organization furnished no evidence to support its claim and therefore the claim must be denied.