NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
David Dolniel-, Referee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
AMERICAN TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSOCIATION
ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the American Train Dispatchers
Association that:
(a) The St. Louis-San Francisco Raihvay Company (hereinafter
"the Gamier") violated the effective Agreement. between the parties,
Article 1 thereof in particular, when on dune 22, 1969, it
required
and/or permitted other than thane covered thereby, to perform work
covered by said Agreement.
(b) Carrier shall now compensate Train Dispatcher R. C. French
one day's compensation at time anal one-half the daily rate appliable 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 1- Saope 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 ii_'e Board's ready 'reference, Article 1, Scope, of t=he Agreement is
here quoted in full text:
"ARTICLE J.
(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 agreeel that one chief dispatcher in each
<lisrratching office shall be excepted from the scope and provisions of
this agreement.
Note (1): Positions -oz excepted chief dispatcher will be filled by
employes holding seniority unisex this agreement.
The various .reasons given far the declination of this claim are set forth
in the Carrier's letter November 19, 7.969, copy attached as Carrier's Exhibit
No. 38. The trainmastex -who is alleged to have committed the violations in
Claim 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 hindrance
or.limita.tion upon him.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD- Employes presented the claim as follows:
"At 10:35 A. 1\1., .lone 1.7, 7 961, -Mr. C. F. Hurt, Txainmaster,
(_-luanah, Texas, instructed No. 31 to svt out two (2) cars at Olustee
ai:d do aozne spotting of the elevator."
Aside front the. fact that the Gar'r.~iev his denied that Train No. 31 did any
work at 02.cvstee on the claim ·date, the messag--- is nothing more than an
instruction to set out cars. It is oat a messat>·e involving the movement of a
train nor does it involve the "distribution of power and equipment" incidental
to the supervision of the handling of a train. 1i. is work which does not belong
exclusively to Train Dispatchers under the Scope Rule. See Awards 189x8.
18689, 18692, 18690 and 18593 and many a,,rards of Public Law Board No.
.5$8 on this property.
FINDINGS.
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
reearcl and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That tha parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employer involved in this dispute are respectively Gamier and Employer within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved .Tune 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein, and
That the Carrier did not violate the Agreement.
AWARD
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: E. A. Killeen
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th (lay of March 1972.
Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, lii. Printed in U.S.A.
19093 16