NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

David Dolnick, Referee

AMERICAN TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSOCIATION

ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the American Train Dispatcher= Association that:

(a) The St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company (hereinafter "the Carrier") violated the effective Agreement between the parties, Article I, thereof in particular, when on June 5, 1969 it required and/or permitted other than those covered thereby, to perform work covered by said Agreement.

(.b) Carrier shall now compensate Train Dispatcher E. J. Linke one day's compensation at time and one-half the daily rate applicable to Assistant Chief Dispatcher for said violation on the rest day of Claimant.

EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: There is an Agreement in effect between the parties, copy of which is on file with this Board, and the same is incorporated into this Ex Parte Submission as though fully set out herein.

Article I-Scope is identical in the Agreement effective September 1, 1949, revised as of January 1, 1953 and again revised effective October 1, 1965, insofar as the rules material to this dispute are concerned.

For the Board's ready reference, Article I, Scope, of the Agreement is here quoted in full text:

"ARTICLE I

(a) SCOPE

This agreement shall govern the hours of service and working conditions of train dispatchers. The term `train dispatcher' as hereinafter used, shall include night chief, assistant chief, trick, relief and extra train dispatchers. It is agreed that one chief dispatcher in each dispatching office shall be excepted from the scope and provisions of this agreement.

hibit No. 38. The trainmaster who is alleged to have committed the viola tions in Claims 37 and 38 is one of the division officers who, as such, has responsible control over the operation of a division, or a terminal, or of a major activity within an operating division, and when acting in the discharge of his duties and responsibilities, it is not mandatory that a division trainmaster exercise such responsible control only through employes of the train dispatchers' class, nor do the Rules of the Train Dispatchers' Agreement place such a hinderance or limitation upon him.

(Exhibits not reproduced.)

OPINION OF BOARD: This claim is predicated on the fact that on June 5, 1969, the trainmaster at Quanah, Texas issued the following instructions to the Operators at the same location:

"Call No. 36 for 8:00 A. M. Call No. 32 for 9:00 A. M."

In Award No. 18458 we said:

"Trainmasters have every right to issue instructions when trains should be called. This is an essential part of his customary and regular duties. They are not duties which belong exclusively to Dispatchers under the Scope Rule."

See also Award No. 18565 and Award No. 3 of Public Law Board No. 588 on this property.

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 Carrier did not violated the Agreement.

AWARD