Award No. 19040 Docket No. SG-14942

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

Claude 5. Woody, Jr., Referee

BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN

ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General 0-mmittee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Illinois Central Railroad that:

(a) The Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, as amended, particularly the Scope, when, on May 8, 1962, it required and/or r·ermitted employes who hold no seniority or other rights under that agrreoient to sc t e po~ver tap pole at an expre:,sway underpass under construction at M;ssissinpi Avenue, Memphis; Tennessee - that pal^. being set for the exclusive purpose of fnrni-En power to speratc out~rnatic signals.

(b) The Cmrier be required t.> com~eiisate hIessrs. L. C. Smith, R. F. Davis, C. F. Brewer, P. L. Smith, L. D. Smith, M. D. Burns, M. F. Clayton, and J. U. Davis for the time con.-::n,ed by other empioyes in setting !,'as pole.

[Ca:ri ~_ s File: 735-21"-130, Case No. 165 Sig.j

EMPLOFE7 S' STATEMENT OF' FACTS: On May 8, 1962 Carrier required and/or permitted norsons nc: cjve,ed by the Sigoatn;en's Agreemer:t to set a pole that was to be used exclusively f·,r the paxpose of furnishing electrical power to operate autornatic higliwwy crossing p rote_Lic:: devices at Ml. nisaippi Avenue, Memphis, Tennessee.

Under date of May lf, 1962, the claimants submittcd a joint claim (Brothcrhood's Exhibit No. 1) to the Divi~_~oi Engincer, asserting the pole to question was set in vicaation of paragraph (b) of the Scope of the Signalmen's Agreement. The Division Enginecr sub!:equently do:ded the claim in a letter to the claimc,ts, ~_n the bass of nast lrrae_ice. That letter is Brotherhood's

The claim was then submitted by the Local Chairman to the Division Engineer on June 4, 1962, an," the latter wrote his letter of denial to the Local Chairman on June 11, 1962. That exchange of correspondence is Brotherhood's Exhibit Nos. :; and 4. On June 23, 1962, the Local Chairman ratified the Division Engineer of the rejection of his decision, then presented an appeal to the Superintendent on the same day. The Superintendent's denial, dated July 31, 1962, is Brotherhood's Exhibit No. 6. On August 10, 1962, the Local Chair-

OPINION OF BOARD: This dispute arose as the result of electrical workers setting a pole upon which they mounted an electric meter and switch (meter loop) to service a highway crossing signal. Signalmen claim that they should have been awarded the work involved in setting the pole.

The record establishes that the subject pole was erected to .support the meter loop and that the work of mounting the meter loop is not in dispute. While it is correct, as Signalmen argue, that the purpose of the pole and meter loop together was to service a crossing signal within their work ,jurisdiction, the pole appurtained to the crossing signal only through the meter loop, and the meter loop appears to be conceded to be a work jurisdiction not exeNsively reserved for Signalmen.

Hence, if the meter loop work is not reserved to Signalmen, neither can it be said that the work of e>,eeting the support pole is so reserved. We must 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 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