(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes ((Formerly Transportation-Communication Division, BRAC) PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines)

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation-Com
 munication, BRAC, on the Southern Pacific Railroad (Pacific
 Lines), that:

 1. Carrier violated the terms and intent of the current Telegraphers' Agreement commencing during January and February, 1967, and continuing on each of three shifts daily thereafter at Colton, Indio and E1 Centro, California, and

 Yuma, Arizona, when it removed Wire Chief work at those stations from the employees to whom it belongs and required or permitted it to be performed by employees not subject to our Agreement.

 2. As a consequence of these violations, the Carrier now shall be required to:











        STATION NAME POSITION REST DAYS

        COLTON: W. C. Edwards 1st WC-PMO-Clk Sat. & Sun.

        " M. E. Smith 2nd WC-TC-PMO Mon. & Tue.

        " F. R. French 3rd WC-TC-PMO Thur. & Fri.

        " L. G. Cundiff Relief WC-TC-PMO Tue. & Wed.

        INDIO: D. G. Dent 1st WC-TC-PMO Sat. & Sun.

        R. L. Stewart 2nd WC-TC-PMO Mon. & Tue.

        " J. E. Senn 3rd WC-TC-PMO Thu. & Fri.

        " L. Rosenfield Relief WC-TC-PMO Tue. & Wed.

        " R. E. Clifford Relief WC-TC-PMO

        Colton-Indio Fri. & Sat.

        EL CENTRO: R. J. Mitchell 1st WC-TC-PMO Sun. & Mon.

        " R. A. Martin 2nd WC-TC-PMO Tue. & Wed.

        " G. W. Lichte 3rd WC-TC-PMO Fri. & Sat.

        " R. S. Bothun Relief WC-TC-PMO Wed. & Thur.

        YUMA: H. D. Hodges MGR-WC-PMO-Clk Sat. & Sun.

        J. P. Ray 2nd WC-TC-PMO Mon. & Tue.

        *Unassigned *3rd WC-TC-PMO Fri. & Sat.

        " W. T. Huey Relief WC-TC-PMO Wed. & Thur.

        R. L. Metzger Relief WC-TC-PMO

                            Yuma-Indio-E1 Centro Thur. & Fri.


          (* Next regular assigned incumbent to become a claimant upon acquiring this position, and his successor likewise.)


          (c) Consent to and cooperate in a check jointly with this Union to determine the facts in any dispute of fact which arises in the course of settling this claim, including but not necessarily limited to identification of proper claimant for each claimant, and certification that all work has been restored.


CARRIER DOCKET: TEL 152-1573 - BU-13483/53

 OPINION OF BOARD: This is a Scope case in which it is alleged that work belong
 ing to Telegraphers under their Agreement with Carrier was
 performed by employees outside the Agreement at Colton, Indio, and El Centro,
 California, and Yuma, Arizona. The claim seeks an award, commencing sixty (60)
 days retroactive from date of receipt of claim, and continuing until alleged
 violations cease, at straight-time Wire Chief rate for each of three shifts at
 the specified stations.

 Third party notice was given to Railway Employees Department, AFL-CIO, the representative of the employees alleged to have performed the disputed work.
                    Award Number 19477 Page 3

                    Docket Number TE-18559

                    FACTS


Prior to this claim the equipment involved in this dispute, i.e., multiplex carrier equipment, was located in telegraph offices at Colton, Indio, and El Centro, California, and Yuma, Arizona. Wire Chief employees at these stations performed the work of testing, patching, and regulating the multiplex equipment during its normal operation.

 In January and February, 1967, the Carrier replaced the long distance telephone lines affecting these offices with a micro wave system.

                    CONTENTIONS OF PARTIES


Petitioner filed claim after the January and February, 1967, changeover, asserting that, during from each of these offices and relocated in nearby huts, and that the work of testing, patching, and regulating the equipment was transferred to employees not covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement. The basis of the claim, to which both parties addressed a substantial volume of pro and con evidence, is that such work belonged to Wire Chiefs under the Scope of the Agreement and also under an oral agreement covering the specific work.

 Carrier's position is that particular dates and specific violations have not been alleged and, further, that the work is not exclusively reserved to Wire Chief employees under the Telegraphers' Agreement. In addition, Carrier denied that equipment was removed from offices and relocated in huts and specifically stated that "s however, it was not relocated in the Microwave Huts but was either retired or diverted for use elsewhere on our system." (Carrier letter, August 23, 1968.)

 Carrier took the further position that the equipment changeover had caused "no basic" change in Wire Chief work at the involved offices. In this regard Carrier's Assistant Superintendent of Communications submitted the following statement:

        "There has been no basic change in the testing & regulating procedures performed by Wire Chief at Colton; Indio, El Centro & Yuma. They continue testing & regulating of physical wires from the Wire Chiefs switchboards in their offices. Test tone levels are run into mods & checked at demods. They continue checking of E & M dialing as well as the telegraph carriers circuit serving their offices. In making these checks the wire chief continue to use the basic test meters that have always been assigned each office. No equipment moved to Hut."

          Award Number 19477 Page 4

                    Docket Number TE-18559


The General Chairman's position regarding the above was stated as follows in a letter of June 3, 1968:

        "With reference to the Memo handwritten and 'signed' with rubber stamp 'GEM Jun 12 1967', which allegedly was furnished by Assistant Superintendent of Communications Mr. G. E. Moss, I told you in conference January 19 that the statements made therein were inaccurate, except that I said I was going to check further concerning the allegation that Wire Chiefs at stations in dispute 'continue checking of the E&M dialing as well as the telegraph carriers circuit serving their offices.' I have found it true that the equipment remaining in their offices does make it possible for them to check E&M dialing. This, however is a very minor portion of the overall testing, regulating and patching work formerly done by them."


                      RESOLUTION


Though the lack of allegations as to particular dates and specific violations was raised on the property, Petitioner's submission to the Board states that "the Fmployees were unable to determine when the alleged violations were occurring." In view of Petitioner's admitted inability to supply the specifics which are necessary to adjudicate this claim on the merits, we are constrained to deny the claim for lack of essential specificity.

 In our recent Award 19416 (Cull), involving these same parties, we sustained claims which showed the specific dates that employees not covered by the Agreement had performed wire chief work in the form of patching telephone circuits at the switchboard, Richmond Station. But in the same Award we denied the claims for violations alleged to have occurred on "subsequent" dates by ruling that:

        " . in line with similar precedent established by awards of S.B.A. 553 (these parties) the claim for dates subsequent to December 4, 1962, must be denied for lack of specificity."


The record before us is equally lacking in specificity and we shall deny the claim.

 i
 i
 l
                Award Number 19477 Page 5

                Docket Number TE-18559


FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
 parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 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 Agreem_nt was not violated.


                      A Id A R D


        Claim denied.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~!~
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of November 1972.

 · ._.