NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
(SUPPLEMENTAL)
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, hereinafter refereed to as the Brotherhood bearing an effective date of July 1, 1952 on file with your Board which by this reference is made a part of this submission.
2. Since 1933, when a manually operated automatic signal system (subsequently changed to a fully automatic signal plant) was installed for the crossing of this Carrier and the Wabash (now the Norfolk and Western Railroad) at Gallatin Missouri, this Carrier has by agreement with the Wabash operated and maintained said interlocking plant.
3. There is no dispute between the parties to this docket that the signal work in connection with the automatic interlocking plant at Gallatin, Missouri, is properly assigned to this Carrier's signal employees.
4. However, in November, 1966 the Norfolk and Western Railroad installed automatic highway crossing signals covering their tracks at that point which crossed Missouri State Highway No. 6 approximately 210 feet from the Rock Island crossing.
5. The operation of the automatic crossing signals covering the Norfolk and Western Railroad's crossing on Highway 6 is independent of the automatic interlocking plant except for certain control wires connecting the two plants.
6. At the time in question this Carrier's forces made certain changes in the wiring of the interlocking at Gallatin to accommodate the control wires needed by the highway crossing signal circuits. These changes are shown in yellow on the attached wiring diagram for the Gallatin Automatic Interlocking Plant, which is attached as Carrier's Exhibit "A."
7. The instant claim was filed by General Chairman R. A. Watkins with Signal Engineer W. B. Johnson on December 6, 1965 on the basis the use of Norfolk and Western Signal Employees to install the automatic crossing signal at Gallatin, Missouri violated the Scope rule on this property.
8. To avoid burdening the record, Carrier has not included copies of the correspondence presented on the property concerning this claim as it is anticipated the Brotherhood will produce such correspondence as a part of its submission. However, Carrier will refer to various portions of this correspondence, as necessary, and will reproduce pertinent portions of same when appropriate. Carrier will also take exception in its rebuttal statement to any errors or omissions in the Brotherhood's reproduction of such correspondence.
9. The procedures followed in the progression of this claim were timely and in accordance with the applicable rules in effect on this property and the Railway Labor Act, as amended.
OPINION OF BOARD: Under an agreement between Carrier and the Wabash Railroad (now the Norfolk & Western and hereinafter called N&W) Carrier constructed and has maintained a joint interlocking plant at Gallatin, Missouri. The installation was made by Carrier's signal forces, and they have since maintained it. This claim is for work done by N&W signal forces in the installation and maintenance of automatic crossing protection on the N&W but within the limits of the home signal of the joint interlocking plant.
Concisely stated, the Employes' position is that all signal work within the limits of the home signals of the joint interlocking plant belongs to Carrier's signal employes. Such a position is too broad.
As a general proposition, the signal work within a joint interlocking plant belongs exclusively to the signal forces of the carrier having the contractual responsibility for the maintenance of such plant. When another carrier, a joint user of the facility, imposes within the limits of the interlocking plant an unrelated installation (such as highway crossing protection devices), the signal forces of the other carrier may install and maintain the superimposed facility but only to the extent that its operation is completely independent of the original interlocking system. This is spelled out in our Award 14037.
The record here reveals that one of Carrier's supervisors connected a circuit or circuits between the protection signals and the interlocking plant and that Carrier paid a claim resulting therefrom. To the extent, if any, that more encroachment took place, the record is inconclusive. Since the burden of proof is on the Employes and they have failed to sustain that burden, the claim will be dismissed.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, 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