NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Francis X. Quinn, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN
THE WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the western Pacific Railroad Company that:
(a) The Western Pacific Railroad Company violates the current
Signalmen's Agreement, effective September 1, 1949, and reprinted July 1, 1961 (including revisions), when it fails and/or
declines to apply Rules 58, 59, 60, 62 and 69 by not advertising
the position of Signal Draftsman-Circuit Designer at Sacramento,
California, for seniority choice.
(b) Mr. A. H. Schmitt be allowed the difference between his assigned rate of General TCS Maintainer and
the rate
of Signal
Draftsman-Circuit Designer for each date he is not afforded the
opportunity to exercise his seniority by bidding on the Signal
Draftsman-Circuit Designer position at Sacramento, California,
commencing January 24, 1966.
(c) Mr. Schmitt be allowed overtime rate of Signal DraftsmanCircuit Designer for any hours which he is caused to perform
service, outside of the assigned hours of the Signal Draftsman
Circuit Designer position, Sacramento, California, commencing
January 24, 1966.
(d) Mr. Schmitt be allowed overtime rate of Signal DraftsmanCircuit Designer for any and all hours that
the assigned
employe, Mr. J. E. Vlasak, is allowed and/or required to perform
overtime service, commencing January 24, 1966.
The above claim is to be considered continuing from January 24, 1966,
until the position of Signal Draftsman-Circuit Designer is properly advertised for seniority choice.
[Carrier's File: D-Case No. 7657-1966-BRS; Local Case No.-None; Signal
Department]
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: This is one of several disputes which arose after Carrier consolidated its Signal and Communications Departments effective January 1, 1966, then transferred the headquarters
for the combined department from San Francisco to Sacramento on or about
January 24, 1966. Signal employes affected by the transfer and/or involved
in this series of disputes, and the positions they held prior to the transfer,
include the following:
OPINION OF BOARD: This dispute is companion to one we have decided in Award 17774 and for the reason stated therein we will deny the
claim.
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 the 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. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of March 1970.
Central Publishing Co., Indianapolis, Ind. 46206 Printed in U.S.A.
17776 4