Corrected Copy
Award Number 17501
Docket Number TE-16691
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Arthur W. Devine, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES
UNION
THE NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD
RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the
Transportation-Communication Employees Union on the New York, New
Haven and Hartford Railroad, that:
CLAIM NO. 1
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
August 10, 11, 13, 24, 27 and 27, 1965 it permitted or required employees not covered by the Agreement to perform
block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut,
(b) Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned to the 2:00 P.M. to 10:00
P.M. operator clerk position at Waterbury shall be paid for a
three (3) hour call on each of the above dates when conductors
cleared the block at Waterbury outside of his assigned hours.
Six (6) calls. Railroad Docket 10223.
CLAIM NO. 2
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
September 21, 28, October 4, 5, 12 and 19, 1965 it permitted or
required employees not covered by the Agreement to perform
block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. A. J. Barkauskas, regularly assigned to the relief position
at Waterbury and working between 3:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M.
on these dates shall be paid for a three (3) hour call on each
of the above dates when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury outside of his assigned hours. Six (6) calls. Railroad
Docket 10241.
CLAIM N0. 3
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
July 19, August 16, 22, 23 and 31, 1965 it required or permitted
employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. A. J. Barkauskas, regularly assigned to the relief position
at Waterbury working 2:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. on the above
dates shall be paid for a three (3) hour call on each of those
dates when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury outside
of his assigned hours. Six (6) calls. Railroad Docket 10226.
CLAIM NO. 4
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
November 2, 1965 it required or permitted employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. A. J. Barbauskas, regularly assigned to the relief position
at Waterbury worked 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. on the above
dates shall be paid for a three (3) hour call when conductors
cleared the block at Waterbury outside of his assigned hours.
One (1) call. Railroad Docket 10291.
CLAIM NO. 5
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
September 1, 4, 8, 8, 10, 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22 and 24, 1965
it required or permitted employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of clearing the block at
Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned operator-clerk at Waterbury
shall be paid for a three (3) hour call on each of the above
dates when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury outside of
his assigned hours. Thirteen (13) calls. Railroad Docket 10258.
CLAIM NO.
6
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
November 4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 17, 17, 19, 24, December 2, 2 and
3, 1965, it required or permitted employees not covered by the
Agreement to do block operator work of clearing the block at
Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned operator-clerk at Waterbury,
Connecticut shall be paid for a three (3) hour call on each of
the above dates when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury
outside of his assigned hours. Thirteen (13) calls. Railroad
Docket 10292.
CLAIM NO. 7
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
October 7, 12, 13, 14, 19 and 21, 1965, it required or permitted
employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Con
necticut.
17501 2
(b) Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned operator-clerk at Waterbury
shall be paid a three (3) hour call on each of the above dates
when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury outside of his
assigned hours. Six (6) calls. Railroad Docket 10293.
CLAIM NO. 8
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
June 30, July 1, 2, 6, 7, 7, 10, 28, 28 and 29, 1965, it permitted or
required employees not covered by the Agreement to perform
block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned to the 2:00 P.M. to 10:00
P.M. operator clerk position at Waterbury shall be paid for a
three (3) hour call on each of the above dates when conductors cleared the block at Waterbury outside of his assigned
hours. Ten (10) calls. Railroad Docket 10225.
CLAIM N0.9
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
November 30, 1965 it required or permitted an employee not
covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of
clearing the block at Danielson, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. H. W. Potter, regularly assigned agent-operater at Danielson shall be paid a three (3) hour call when on November
30, 1965 conductor cleared the block at Danielson outside of his
assigned hours. Railroad Docket 10296.
CLAIM NO. 10
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
January 18, 1966, it required or permitted an employee not
covered by the Agreement to perform block operator work of
clearing the block at Danielson, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. D. W. McCaw temporarily assigned agent-operator at Danielson shall be paid a three (3) hour call when the conductor of
Work Extra 1210 cleared the block at Danielson. Railroad
Docket 10351.
CLAIM NO. 11
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
December 7, 14, 14, 21, 1965, January 10, 11, 24 and 24, 1966,
it required or permitted an employee not covered by the
Agreement to perform block operator work of clearing the block
at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Mr. A. J. Barkauskas, regularly assigned relief operator at
Waterbury, Connecticut, shall be paid a call of three (3) hours
for each violation. Seven (7) calls. Railroad Docket 10362.
17501 3
CLAIM NO. 12
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
February 1, 3, 8, 10, 15, 16, 18, 22 and, 25, 1966, it required
or permitted employees not covered by the Agreement to perform
block operator work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Carrier shall pay Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned operatorclerk at Waterbury, Connecticut a call of three (3) hours for
each violation, ten (10) calls. Railroad Docket 10390.
CLAIM NO. 13
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
February 1, 7, 14 and 22, 1966, it required or permitted employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator
work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Carrier shall pay Mr. A. J. Barkauskas a call of three (3)
hours for each violation, four (4), calls. Railroad Docket 10391.
CLAIM NO. 14
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
January 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 24, 25, 27 and 28,
1966, it required or permitted employees not covered by the
Agreement between the parties to perform block operator work
of clearing the block at Plainville, Connecticut.
(b) Carrier shall pay Mr. J. T. Carrah, agent-operator at Plainville, Connecticut, a call for each violation, fifteen (15) calls.
Railroad Docket 10361.
CLAIM NO. 15
(a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
December 14, 16, 18, 23, 24, 28, 1965, January 4, 6, 8, 13, 15,
20, 22, 26 and 27 and 28, 1966, it required or permitted employees not covered by the Agreement to perform block operator
work of clearing the block at Waterbury, Connecticut.
(b) Carrier shall pay Mr. L. Bloom, regularly assigned operatorclerk at Waterbury, Connecticut, a call, three hours for each
violation, sixteen (16) calls. Railroad Docket 10366.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: An agreement between the
New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company and this Union,
dated September 1, 1949, as amended and supplemented is available to your
Board and by this reference is made a part hereof.
These claims were presented and progressed in accordance with the time
limits provided by the Agreement up to and including appeal and conference with the highest officer designated by the Carrier to receive appeals.
Having failed to reach a settlement, the Employees now appeal to your
Honorable Board for adjudication.
17501 4
OPINION OF BOARD: The essential issues and material facts in
Claims Nos. 1 through 8, Claims Nos. 11 through 13, and Claim No. 15 are
practically identical with those considered in Awards 16304 and 16305 involving the same location, Waterbury, Connecticut. Based on those Awards, which
we do not find to be in palpable error, Claims Nos. 1 through 8, Claims
Nos. 11 through 13, and Claim No, 15 will be denied.
Claims Nos. 9 and 10 involve Danielson, Connecticut. The Petitioner
contends that for many years a second trick position, with assigned hours
4:00 P.M. to midnight, was maintained at Danielson, and previous to that,
three tricks were maintained, furnishing blocking and train order service
twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week. This contention is not refuted by the Carrier. The alleged violations occurred at about 5:00 P.M. in
Claim No. 9 and at about 5:50 P.M. in Claim No. 10. On authority of
Award 13696, involving the same parties, Claims Nos. 9 and 10 will be
sustained.
Claim No. 14 involves Plainville, Connecticut. The Petitioner contends
that up until a few years ago, three telegraphers were employed at Plainville, one on each shift, providing twenty-four hour blocking and train order
service, seven days per week, which contention is not refuted by the Carrier.
Based on Award 13696, Claim No. 14 will be sustained.
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 only in Claims Nos. 9, 10 and 14.
AWARD
Claims No. 9, 10 and 14 sustained; Claims No. 1 through 8, Claims Nos.
11 through 13 and Claim No. 15 denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of September 1969.
Central Publishing Co., Indianapolis, Ind. 46206 Printed in U.S.A.
17501 10