NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Jobn B. Criswell, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN
ERIE-LACKAWANNA RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of the
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Erie Lackawanna Railroad Company that:
(a) Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, as
amended, when it failed and/or refused to properly notify the employes of the Signal Department that operations were suspended
and positions were abolished, effective at the regular starting time
on Monday, July 17, 1967.
(b-1) Carrier be required now to pay Kent Division Signal
Department Employes one full day's pay for July 17, 1967.
(b-2) Carrier be required now to pay Marion Division (Kent
District and Marion District) Signal Employes (G. C. Artrip, Jr.,
and 74 other named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight time
rate of their respective positions on July 17, 1967, and overtime
that may be involved account of the violation.
(b-3) Carrier be required now to pay Mahoning Seniority
District Employes (F. A. Loutzenhiser and 52 other named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight time rate of their respective
positions for July 17, 1967, account of the violation.
(b-4) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Allegheny-Meadville Seniority District (Stephen
J. Muzi and 11 other named employes) in accordance with the provisions of Rule 17 five (5) hours and twenty (20) minutes at the
overtime rate account calls made on Sunday, July 16, 1967, that
positions were abolished and on Monday, July 17, 1967, that there
was a recall to work scheduled for July 18, 1967.
(b-5) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Allegheny-Meadville Seniority District (Stephen
J. Muzi and 11 other named employes) eight (8) hours at the
straight time rate of their respective positions for July 17, 1967,
account of the violation.
(b-6) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the New York Division (I. Vanoordt and 34 other
named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight time rate of their
respective positions for July 17, 1967, account of the violation.
(b-7) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the New York Division (O. Spiecker, Jr., and 28
other named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight time rate
of their respective positions on July 17, 1967, account of the violation.
(b-8) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Buffalo Division (R. A. Flick and 23 other named
employes) under the jurisdiction of Signal Supervisor G. Milanoski,
eight (8) hours at the straight time rate of their respective positions
on July 17, 1967, and any overtime that may be involved account
of the violation.
(b-9) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Buffalo Division, under the jurisdiction of Signal
Supervisor (Acting) D. R. Hockenberry, eight (8) hours at the
straight time rate of their respective positions on July 17, 1967,
account of the violation.
(b-10) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Scranton Seniority District (E. Keiper, Jr., and
20 other named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight time rate
of their respective positions on July 17, 1967, account of the
violation.
(b-11) Carrier be required now to pay Signal Department
Employes on the Susquehanna Division Seniority District (E. L.
Lester and 48 other named employes) eight (8) hours at the straight
time rate of their respective positions on July 17, 1967, account of
the violation.
(b-12) Carrier be required now to pay (W. D. Zartman and
37 others) Signal Department Employes on the Marion District
eight (8) hours at the straight time rate of their respective positions
on July 17, 1967, account of the violation.
(b-13) Carrier be required now to pay (W. A. Wolfe, Jr.,
and 19 others) Signal Department Employes on the Mahoning Division (Allegany-Meadville) eight (8) hours at the straight time rate
of their respective positions on July 17, 1967, account of the violation. (Carrier's File: 160-SIG).
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
There is an agreement between the parties to this dispute bearing an effective date of March 1, 1953,
as amended, which provides in part:
"Rule 34. When force is reduced the senior man in a class on
a seniority district capable of performing the work shall be retained.
AS
much advance notice as possible will be given to employes laid
off; in any event, not less than thirty (30) hours."
18315 2
C. M. Miller, A. G. Storey, M. Rhow, R. W. Clark, G. S. Roe, Jr., and C.
Abrams, Jr., as all other employes appear in the instant claim under "b-5"
(Carrier's Exhibit "J").
"Each and every one of the Signal Department employes" involved
herein were also included in an identical dispute before SBA 605, identified
as Case No. SG-2(,-E, which was disposed of by Award 118 denying the
claim of the Organization. Award 118 and Award 115 referred to therein
are attached as Carrier's Exhibits "K" and "L".
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
The Organization comes to this Board with a
statement of claim as quoted above, asking compensation for a number of
employes of the Signal Department for improper notice that operations were
suspended on certain dates.
Special Board of Adjustment No. 605, between these same parties, had
before it as Case No. SG-26-E, a claim which reads as follows:
"(a) Carrier violated Article I, Section 4, of the agreement
of February 7, 1965, when it failed and/or refused to properly
notify the employes of the Signal Department, New York Division,
that operation was suspended and positions were abolished effective
at regular starting time Monday, July 17, 1967.
"(b) Each and every one of the Signal Department employes
adversely affected by an alleged strike on July 17, 1967, be paid
(8) hours at the straight-time rate of their respective positions for
July 17, 1967, account of violation cited in the claim (a) above.
"Several employes who were adversely affected are named, this
claim, as stated above, is for each and every one of the Signal Department employes that were affected."
It is clear that the question brought to this Board has been heard by
Special Board of Adjustment No. 605. It was dismissed as Award 118.
In Award 1223 (Coburn), Fourth Division, this Board said:
. A Special Board of Adjustment established in accordance
with (Section 3, Second, of the Railway Labor Act, is a tribunal of
coordinate jurisdiction with the Division of the Board . . . There
has been no judicial nullification of Award No. 34, however, and
certainly we have no power to do so. We could no more annul it
or set it aside than to overrule or redetermine any claim submitted
and adjudicated by other Divisions of this Board. The law permits
only one administrative adjudication of a contractual claim . , .
We follow this Award and Awards 17610, 17611, 17786, 17787, 17788,
18126 and dismiss the claim.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the evidence,
finds and holds:
18315 5
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 claim is moot.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: S. H. Schulty
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of December 1970.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.3. X
18315 6