,tea_ Award No. 18807
 Docket No. TE-19209





PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION DIVISION, BRAC
 CHICAGO AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation-Communication Division, BRAC, on the Chicago and North Western Railroad, T-C 5803, that:

1. Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when, on September 27, October 4, 11, 18, 25, November 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, December 6, 13, 20 and 27, 1969, it deprived Telegrapher-Clerk J. A. Beck, Fort Dodge, Iowa of the right to perform work of his position on the rest days thereof in the absence of a relief employe.

 2. Carrier shall, as a result, compensate J. A. Beck at the time and one-half rate for the following:
















1. Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when, on October 18 and 25, 1969, it deprived Telegrapher-Clerk C. M. Clark, Fort Dodge, Iowa of the right to perform the work of his position on the rest days thereof in the absence of a relief employe.

 2. Carrier shall, as a result, compensate C. M. Clark at the time and one-half rate for the following;





EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: There is offered into evidence an Agreement between the parties, effective June 1, 1948, originally entered into by the Chicago Great Western Railway and its telegrapher employes represented by The Order of Railroad Telegraphers, which is on file with your Board and by this reference is made a part hereof.


Carrier subsequently merged with the Chicago and Northwestern Railway and the Organization became the T-C Division, Brotherhood of Railway and Airline Clerks, the effectiveness of the Agreement being maintained throughout these changes. The claims were timely presented, progressed, including conference with highest officer designated by Carrier to receive appeals, and have remained declined. The Employes, therefore, appeal to your Honorable Board for adjudication.


The claims arose when Carrier required and permitted the monthly rated agent at Fort Dodge, Iowa, who may be used on the sixth day without additional cost, to handle train orders on the Saturday unassigned rest days of Claimants who are incumbents of two telegrapher-clerk positions at Fort Dodge and who perform all train order work during the working days of their positions.


The Employes contend that where work is required on the rest days of positions which are not made a part of regular relief assignments that Carrier may use an available extra or unassigned employe who will otherwise not l=ave forty hours of work that week and in all other cases the regular employe who in these claims are made claimants.


Carrier defends on the grounds that the monthly rated agent comes within the Scope of the Agreement, and that while he does not perform any train order work on Monday through Friday, that he can be used on Saturdays to perform such work without additional cost to the Carrier and the work thus becomes a part of his assignment on Saturdays and is not unassigned work as contended by the Employes.




Did the Carrier violate the Agreement when it failed to use the regular incumbents of the Telegrapher-Clerk positions at Fort Dodge, Iowa to perform work of handling train orders on their Saturday rest day which is exclusively performed by them during their assigned work days?




J. A. Beck, at the time of occurrence involved in this claim, was regularly assigned to the first shift Telegrapher-Clerk position at Fort Dodge, Iowa with regular hours of 6:00 A. M. to 2:00 P. M., a five day position assigned to work Monday through Friday with Saturday and Sunday as rest days.


C. M. Clark, was regularly assigned to the second shift Telegrapher-Clerk position at Fort Dodge with regular hours of 2:00 P. M. to 11:00 P. M., also a five day position assigned to work Monday through Friday with Saturday and Sunday as rest days.


18807 2







































18807 9

























18807 10

Claim is appealed from the January 222, 1970 decision of Superintendent Hanson Oelwein, Iowa, his file TCU-9-27-69-20 as follows:

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of General Committee of Transportation-Communication Division 96 of 13RAC on the Chicago Western Railway as follows-:



















STATEMENT OF FACTS: J. A. Beck is assigned telegrapherclerk, Fort Dodge, Iowa hours 6 A. M. to 2 P. M. Monday-Friday, Rest days Saturday and Sunday no relief furnished.

 C. M. Clark is assigned telegrapher-clerk, Fort Dodge, Iowa hours 2 P. M. to 10 P. M. Monday- Friday, Rest days Saturday and Sunday no relief furnished.

 There is also at Fort Dodge a monthly rated agent as provided in Addendum No. 2 of the Agreement.

 Each of the dates here listed are Saturdays, one of the rest days of the claimants. On each of the dates the Carrier allowed the monthly rated agent to perform the work of these telegraphers in amounts as listed instead of using the telegrapher involved to per-

 18807 18

You state you are advised the claim for Sept. 27, 1969 is outlawed under the tune limit rule by Supt. Hanson as stated in my letter of March 17, 1970 to him. This is true but I assume he also advised you I stated this had happened due to our working on agreement rule changes in your office during this period of tame and the claim for this instant date was appealed 62 (lays after previous denial decision. If Carrier wants to be this small about this one date of the claim then that is their perogative. However there are no other procedural difficulties in these claims so I will proceed from here.




You then state there was no agreement violation in using the monthly rated agent to perform service on his assigned days and which we cannot agree with as he is and was during the dates of these ciaims not entitled to perform work on the rest days of the telegralhers, the exact work and dupes which the telegraphers performed on their work- days of the'( regular work weeks, and which work the monthly rated agent did rot perform during the other days of h:s assignment.







Your decisions are unacceptable and I regret that we will have to pursue these cases further.




                      M. C. Ruid

                      General Chairman


                                Claim No. 1


18807 17
                    Oalwein Iowa

                    March 4, 1970

                    File: TCU-12-6-69-24


    Mr. M. C. Ruid

    General Chairman TCEU

    P. O. Box 612

    Eau Claire, Wis. 54701


    Dear Mr. Raid:


    Please refer to your letter of February 2, 1970, in which you appeal the claim of Telegrapher-Clerk J. A. Beck, Fort Dodge, for three two-hour calls December 6, 1969, two two-hour calls December 13, 1969, two two-hour calls December 20, 1969, two two-hour calls plus ten minutes at overtime rate December 27, 1969, account agent at Fort Dodge copying train orders on the Saturdays listed, the regular rest day of claimant's assignment.


    The facts in this case are substantially as outlined in your letter of February 2, 1970. However, inasmuch as the work complained of was performed by an employe coming within the scope of the Telegraphers' Agreement, it is our position that the claims lack support of schedule rules and accordingly are declined.


                    5-ours truly,


                      /s/ G. R. Hanson

                      G. R. Hanson

                      Superintendent


                              Claim No. 2


    TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES UNION

              System Division No. 96

              March 17, 1970

    Mr. W. J. Ferman

    Director of Labor Relations

    Former CGW District C&NW Ry. Go.

    500 West Madison Street

    Chicago, Illinois 60606 File R-321


    Dear Sir:


    Claims are appealed from the March 4, 1970 decision of Superintendent Hanson, Oelwein, Iowa his file TCU-12-6-69-24 as follows:


    STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of General Committee of Transportation-Communication Division 96 of 13RAC on the Chicago Great Western Railway as follows:


      1. Carrier violated the Agreement when on Dec. 6, 13, 20, 27, 1969 it deprived Telegrapher-Clerk J. A. Beck, Fort Dodge, Iowa of the right to perform the work of the position assigned on the rest days thereof in the absence of a proper relief employe.


18807 21
    2. Carrier shall, because of the violations listed compensate J. A. Beek at the time and one-half rate as follows:


        December 6, 1969 Three 2 hour calls

        December 13, 1969 Two 2 hour calls

        December 20, 1969 Two 2 hour calls

        December 27, 1969 Two 2 hour calls plus 10

        mits. at overtime rate.


STATEMENT OF FACTS: J. A. Beck is the assigned telegrapher-clerk, Fort Dodge, Iowa hours 6 A. M. to 2 P. M. Monday - F'riday, Rest days Saturday and Sunday no relief furnished. There is also at Fort Dodge a monthly rated Agent as provided in Addendum No. 2 of the CGW Agreement of June 1, 1948 at the time of this claim.


There is also another telegrapher-clerk position at Fort Dodge which is not involved in this claim with assigned hours 2 P. M. to 10 P. M. Monday - Friday, rest days Saturday and Sunday no relief furnished.


Each of the dates here listed are Saturdays, one of the rest days of the claimant. On each of the dates the Carrier allowed the monthly rated agent to perform the work of the claimant in amounts as listed instead of using the telegrapher involved to perform this work which is his to perform during the regular work-week of his position. The contents of this work are as outlined on timeslip form 490.


EMPLOYES POSITION: It is our position that all work of handling work and duties on rest days must be performed as provided in Rule 8(m) of the agreement. This issue has been decided in past years in many instances in favor of the employes in that work on unassigned days must be properly assigned under the rules and not unilaterally given to any employe whom happens to be available or working at the time. Rule 16 provides that train orders and communication of record belong to the employes under the agreement. Rule 5 supports the amount of payment claimed here.


The following 3rd Diva. NRAB Awards sustain the Organizations position under the National Rest Day Rule adopted in 1949 which covers this instant claim. 4728 - 4775 - 4817 - 5760 - 6019 - 6562 - 6688 - 6689 - 6693 - 6946 - 9946 - 10575 - 10646 - 11565 - 11723 - 12137 - 13142 - 13354 - 13618 - 13824 - 14029 - 14071 - 14137 - 14160 - 14191 - 14255 - 14379 - 14626 - 14703 - 14903 - 15064 - 15328 - 15791 - 17436 - 17437 - 17581 - 17844.


Will you kindly consider advising. Mr. Hanson has been advised his decision is not acceptable.

                      /s/ M. C. Ruid

                      M. C. Raid

                      General Chairman


                            Claim No. 2


TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES UNION

System Division No. 96

March 17, 1970


18807 22

Beck, Fart Dodge Iowa. The claimant was assigned to work as TelegrapherClexk at Fort Dodge, daily except Sunday, 6:00 A. M. until 2:00 P. M. Claims are also submitted in behalf of Telegrapher-Clerk C. M. Clark on Saturdays, October 18 and 25, 1969, for calls. He was assigned to work as TelegrapherC'lerk, daily except Sunday, 2:00 F. M. until 10:00 P. 112., at Fort Dodge.


In addition to the claimant Telegrapher-Clerks, a monthly rated agent coming under the scope of the same agreement teas employed at Fort Dodge working daily except Sunday. On the dates of claim, he copied train orders and issued clearances.


Claim is submitted on the basis of the employes' contention that the performance of this work by the agent on Saturdays, which was performed by the claimants on their work days, was a violation of the Agreement.


    The claims have been denied.


OPINION Oh` BOARD: At the time the claim herein arose the Claimants were employed at Fort Dodge, Iowa, as telegrapher-clerks, with work weeks of Monday through Friday, on which days their duties included the copying of train orders and the issuance of clearances. The Carrier also employed at Fort Dodge a monthly rated agent covered by the same agreement ax:d on the same seniority district as Claimants, and v;ho was assigned to work Monday through Saturday. The claims xoose because of the monthly rated agent handling train crdecs and clearances cn Sutnrday·s.


The Petitioiiei relies prinnari:v on Rule 8, Section 1(M) - Work on Unassigned Days rule of. the National Forty Himr v'eek Agreement and contends that the Claimants should have been called on their rest days to handle the train orders. The Carrier takes the position that there is no restriction in the agreement against the monthly rated agent handling train orders, that such work may be properly assigned to him on Saturdays, and that a, the work on Saturdays was part of the monthly rated agent's assignment, it was not "work performed on a day which is not part of any assignment" as r·=erred to in the Work on Unassigned Days rule.


In its submissioai the Petitioner cites and relies upon Awards 6688 and 6689, among others. In the discussion of the dispute the Carrier and Labor Members have cited numerous other awards which they contend support their respective positions.


Our attention has been called to Ar:ard 6916 and the long line of awards which appear to be consistent therewith holding in effect that work of two separate positions in the same seniority class and in the same seniority district may be combined on the rest days of one of the positions. See Awards 8136, 9030, 9092, 9043, 9105, 9179, 0577, 9772, 10056, 10622, 15905. Those awards are ecrntrolling herein and in accordance therewith the claim will be denied. This case is clearly distinguishable from some of. the cases cited by and in behalf of the Organization, including some decided by this referee, where the work on the rest day of the Claimant was performed by employes of another craft.


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjjust.ment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


    That the parties waived oral hearing;


18807 27
 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 not violated.

                AWARD

Claim denied.

              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

              By Order of THIRD DIVISION


              ATTEST: E. A. Killeen

              Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 12th day of November 1971.

 Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
 18807 28