NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
David L. Kabaker, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES UNION
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (Pacific Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of the
Transportation-Communication Employees Union on the Southern Pacific
(Pacific Lines), that:
1. Carrier violated and continues to violate the terms of an
agreement between the parties hereto when commencing August
19, 1964, it requires or permits an employe not subject to said
agreement at Chico, California, to receive oral instructions in lieu
of train orders, copies train orders, or handles messages or reports
of record between Chico and the train dispatchers at Roseville, California over the telephone.
2. Carrier shall, as a consequence of these violations, be required to:
(A) Cease the violations and restore the work to the employes subject to the parties agreement entitled to
perform it.
*(B) Compensate the senior qualified available extra telegrapher one (1) day's pay at min mum .straight time
telegrapher-clerk rate on the Division (or when no
such extra is available, compensate the senior regular
ass'·gned telegrapher class employe idle on his rest
day or days at the point nearest to Chico, one (1)
day's pay at the overtime rate of his position) for
each date of violation.
The following regular assigned employes, or their
successors are (among others) claimants on their
rest days when no qualified extra employe is available:
C. L. Clark Valley Relief Rest Days Tues. Sa Wed.
G. C. Bayard Agent-Chico (extra) Sat. & Sun.
W. T. Watson Mgr. W/C Rville Sun. & M on.
R. IC. Edgeman Tlgr-Clk Rville Mon. & Tues.
C. M. Thompson Rif T/C PMO Rville Wed. & Thu.
E. C. Akarly 2 W/C T/C PMO Rville " Tue. & Wed.
E. J. Morgan 3 W/CT/C PMO Rville " Sat. & Sun.
K. R. Brown :3 T/ C PMO Rville Thu, & Fri.
E. C. Dyer 1 T/C PMO Rville " Thu. & Fri.
E. H. McManus Rlf W/C T/C PMO Rville " Fri. & Sat.
See statement of facts for adjustment in compensation
demanded.
A joint check of Carrier's records (made verbally in conference) to identify the proper claimant or claimants is requested.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The claim in this case is based
upon the provisions of an Agreement etrective December 1, 1944 (reprinted
October 15, 1963, including reNisions) and as otherwise amended and sup
plemented, made between the Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines),
hereinafter referred to as Carn·icr, a, ,d The Order of Railroad Telegraphers
now renamed the ~r,ansportation-Communication Employees Union, herein
after referred to as Employes and/or Union. Copies of these agreements
are on file with yoar Board, and by this reference made a part hereof.
At page 52 of the current agreement, under the wage scale, is listed the
one (1) remaining position at Chico, California, on the effective date of said
Agreement. For ready reference tire listing reads:
"SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Hourly Rate
Location Title of Position of Pay
x a s
Chico -Agent-Telegrapher
Mo. rate $563.16 $3.2366
At page 40 of the Wage Scale of the December 1, 1944 Agreement,
prior to its reprint'ng and revision, the Carrier maintained around-the-clock
positions at Chico, California. The listing being as follows:
"SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Hourly Rate
Location Title of Position of Pay
a a x
Chico -Agent Monthly rate $280.08 $1.3729
" 1st Telegrapher-Clerk .975
" 2nd Telegrapher-Clerk .975
" 3rd Telegrapher-Clerk .975
18041
not constitute a proper claim and is therefore not properly before
us and your request in conference for joint check of records to develop such information is denied as there is no agreement provision
which requires Carrier to comply with such request.
"Without prejudice to our above position, the facts in this
case disclose that the local freight assignments involved in this
case are bulletined to go on duty at Chico, an intermediate point
in CTC territory. The bulletins advertising such assignments specifically state what the on-duty time will be, the same as assignments
in your craft. Our investigation reveals that the conductor on the
assignments involved when contacting the dispatcher for the purpose
of complying with Rule 781 of the Rules and Regulations of the
Transportation Department were only required by the dispatcher
to identify themselves and the engine they were operating with.
The dispatcher, after establishing identity of the conductors, verbally
advised the conductors concerning track conditions as required by
Rule 781. In this connection there is no requirement for nor do
we agree that the conductors involved copied any orders as contended by you.
"The flow of information between conductor of said train and
the train dispatcher as set forth in your letter contrary to your
contention is system practice dating back some 35 years under CTC
Operation. Rule 781 of the Rules and Regulations of the Transportation Department is particularly involved. This rule was fol
lowed in the instant case in the same manner as has been done
over the entire system of the Carrier since the inception of CTC
rules, during which time your Organization has never contended
nor does Carrier concede such handling to be handling train orders
within the meaning and intent of Rule 29 of the current agreement
or handling of communication of record as that term has been used.
"None of the work claimed herein in any way involved or contravened rights exclusively reserved to telegraphers on this property;
therefore, the claim is not supported by any agreement or other
references cited by you and it is denied."
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
In all essential respects this dispute is identical
to that disposed of in our Award 18040, involving the same parties.
For the reason there stated, and in the same manner, this claim will
likewise be dismissed.
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;
18041 20
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of July 7 970.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
19041 21