Award Number 17324
Docket Number SG-17959
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Arthur
w.
Devine, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN
PENN CENTRAL COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of the
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Penn Central Company (Former
Pennsylvania Railroad Company) that:
(a) The Company has violated and is continuing to violate the Agreement, especially, Article 5, Section 1(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e)
as amended June 1, 1962, and others, when in a letter dated
October 27, 1966 it issued orders requiring the following named
employes in the "foreman class", A. V. Roger, A. F. Rawski, H. A.
Dapper, J. A. Kosar, V. T. Caulkins, J. S. O'Lear and V. P. Spiri
to hold themselves available at all times after their regular tour
of duty and assignments for emergency duty.
(b) The seven (7) named employes of the "foreman class", set
forth in claim (a) above, be paid sixteen (16) hours at the
time and one-half rate of their respective positions for Mondays to Fridays inclusive; and that they be paid twenty-four
(24) hours at the time and one-half rate of their respective
positions for Saturdays and Sundays, account of the requirements contained in the letter and the violations mentioned in
Claim (a) above, from October 28, 1966 and until corrected.
(Carrier's File: System Docket No. 580-Pittsburgh Division
Case No. BRS-157)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On October 27, 1966, Carrier
issued written instructions to Inspectors and Foremen under the jurisdiction
of Communication & Signal Supervisor R. C. Ryberg that they were required
to be available for calls. They were instructed to arrange compliance and
advise either the Supervisor or Assistant Supervisor C. & S. where they
could be contacted when away from home after regular working hours.
The notice signed by Mr. Rybert is Brotherhood's Exhibit No. 1.
Inasmuch as the controlling Agreement contains no "Subject-to-Call"
rule and there is no requirements for the employes to provide stand-by
service without being paid additional compensation for such service, a claim
was entered by Local Chairman D. Murphy on behalf of the seven (7)
employes in the so-called "Foreman Class", who were directly affected by
the directive and to whom the notice had been addressed. The claim is
Brotherhood's Exhibit No. 2 and was dated November 11, 1966.
Please arrange, advising this office or your Assistant Supervisor
where you may be contacted when away from your home after
regular working hours, for any lengthy period of time."
In his letter of November 21, 1966, the Supervisor, C.&S. rescinded the
instructions contained in his notice of October 27th.
Each of the named Claimants is regularly assigned either as a Foreman,
C.&S. or as an Inspector, C.&S. on the Pittsburgh Division.
By letter dated November 11, 1966, the Local Chairman, Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen, presented a claim identical to that outlined above in
the Employes' Statement of Claim to the Supervisor, C.&S. The Supervisor
denied the claim on November 21, 1966.
The claim was handled thereafter in accordance with the normal grievance procedure to the Manager, Labor Relations (now Director, Labor
Relations), the highest officer of the Carrier designated to handle disputes.
In progressing the claim, the parties prepared a Joint Submission, a copy of
which is attached as Exhibit "1".
The General Chairman presented the claim to the Manager, Labor Relations at their meeting on October 24, 1967. The Manager denied the claim
by letter of December 18, 1967, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "2".
Therefore, so far as the Carrier is able to anticipate the basis of this
claim, the questions to be decided by your Honorable Board are whether
Carrier violated the Rules Agreement and whether the Claimants are entitled
to the compensation claimed.
(Exhibits not reproduced)
OPINION OF BOARD:
On October 27, 1966, the Carrier's (former
Pennsylvania Railroad Company) Supervisor, Communcations and Signals,
Pittsburgh Division, issued the following notice to Foremen, C. & S. and
Inspectors, C. &. S.:
"Inspectors C. & S. and Foremen C. & S. are supervision and
are required to be available for emergency calls.
"Please arrange, advising this office or your Assistant Supervisor where you may be contacted when away from your home
after regular working hours, for any lengthy period of time."
The instructions were later rescinded on November 21, 1966.
Article 5, Section 1, paragraphs (a) through (e) of the applicable
Agreement, reads:
"It is agreed that Article 5, Section 1 of the Schedule Agreement
shall be amended in certain respects and that effective June 1, 1962,
shall read as follows:
"(a) (Effective June 1, 1962) Inspectors, assistant inspectors,
foremen and assistant foremen shall be paid monthly rates of pay
based on 174 hours per month. Their straight time hourly rate
will be determined by dividing the monthly rate by 174.
17324 8
"(b) (Effective June 1, 1962) The normal hours of the assignment of the inspectors, assistant inspectors, foremen and assistant
foremen shall be S hours per day, 5 days per week. They shall be
assigned two consecutive rest_daya each week, one of which shall be
Sunday, if possible. The present practice of allowing employes of
these classes to be off duty on the seven (7) designated holidays
shall be continued.
"(c) (Effective June 1, 1962) When inspectors, assistant inspectors, foremen or assistant foremen are required to perform service
on the rest days of their assignment, they will be compensated for
such time on the actual minute basis, with a minimum of two hours
and forty minutes, at the rate of one and one-half times the straight
time hourly rate of pay.
"(d) (Effective June 1, 1962) When inspectors, assistant inspectors, foremen or assistant foremen are required to perform service
outside of and continuous with the hours of their regular assignment, on other than rest days, they will be compensated for such
time worked on the minute basis. at ,the rate of one and one-half
times the straight time hourly rate of pay.
"(e) (Effective June 1, 1962) When inspectors, assistant inspectors, foremen or assistant foremen are notified or called to perform
service outside of and not continuous with the regularly assigned
working hours they shall report for duty with reasonable promptness
and shall be paid a minimum of two hours and forty minutes at
the rate of time and one-half. If held on duty longer than two
hours and forty minutes, they shall be paid at the rate of time and
one-half on the actual minute basis.
"The time of employes so notified to report at a designated
time to perform service outside of and not continuous with the
regularly assigned working hours shall begin at the time required
to report and end when released. The time of employes so called
to perform such service immediately shall begin at the time called
and end when they return to their headquarters."
The Petitioner contends that the instructions issued on October 27, 1966,
were in violation of the quoted section of Article 5, in that the instructions
required the Claimants to be available for calls and the Carrier refused to
pay them for such service.
Article 5 clearly contemplates that employes covered will be used outside their normal hours and provides the method of pay for such service.
We agree with the argument on behalf of Carrier that if the Carrier
is required to call Claimants for service outside their normal hours, there
is also an obligation on Claimants to be available. The existence of the
instructions of October 27, 1966, in itself, did not cause any of the Claimants to perform any service outside of their normal hours. The notice did
nothing more than to instruct the Claimants to notify the Supervisor or
the Assistant Supervisor of their whereabouts if they anticipated being
away from their home for
"any lengthy period of time."
17324 9
There is no justification for the claims in behalf of Claimants for
payments the same as if they performed service on the rest days of their
assignments or outside their regular hours as set forth in paragraphs (c),
(d) and (e) of Section 1, Article 6, of the Agreement. The claim will, therefore, be denied.
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 not violated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST: S. H. SUhulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of July 1969.
Central Publishing Co., Indianapolis, Ind. 46206 Printed in U.S.A.
17324 10