(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STET°?BNT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when, without prior notification to or discussion and agr outside forces to perform work nn Pier 6 on June 29 and 30, July 1, 3, 4 and 5, 1970 (System File MW-LP-70-2).

(2) B&D employes W. S. Williamson, L. La Simmerman, A. D. Gilbert, R. E. Lee, W. Lee, T. E. Pritchard and T. R. Southworth each be allowed pay at their respective straight-time rates for an equal proportionate share of the total number of man hours expended by outside forces in performing the work mentioned in Part (1).

)PINION OF BOArID: The Organization contends that the Carrier violated Article
IV of the May 17, 1968 National Agreement when it failed to give notice to the Organization before contracting out the work of repairing the No. 1 Loader at Pier 6 from June 29 through July 5, 1970, Tlic work involved the replacement of a sprocket gear and work incidental to that effort. It is undisputed that Carrier fai above.

In its defense, the Carrier asserts that Claimants had neither the skills nor the squirm,^t required to perform the work in question; however, Carrier presented no evid=nee in support of its assertion. Carrier also contends that the Claimants lost no earnings.

This Eoard, in Award No. 12305 (followed by a long line of concurring decisions) refused to accept the argument that the Organization must prove "exclusivity" prior to Ca reaffirm that reasoning and therefore sustain Part 1 of the Claim.

Ile arc reluctant to treat blatant violations of contractual rights by simple reprimand. Obviously, calculated violation of the contract, such as in this case, cannot lead to a constructive relationship between the parties, as ccntemplated by the Act. Ho·.·ever, since Claimants suffered no monetary loss, we shall follow Awards 18305, 18687, 19153 and many others, in denying Part 2 of the Claim.







That the: Carrier an4 t',a rmnleves imralcrrd in thip. c'.i spzito are respectively Carrier ?a:? ~·:Lc·,·cc within the mennir;;,- of the Railimy Labor as approved June ?l, '_934;J,

Tbe,t th5.r. L-;~.^i en of the AciJ;a;r_mt Board h;:c juxi:dietion over the disptitn invelve6;·cre'_.~; ,.^





        Part (1) of the Claim is sustained.


        Pr~rt (2) o` t?ie Claim is denied.


                          J,'...,. V ,j ,..~ ...,1rr ~, .,.,-.,_~ .`_~;..

                          fy OrdoY' c::' .'':i-.:`C~ bil·icicn


""

Pnted ._. Cl:ict;:o. I17.: ;,.,_:., . a r 30th c:,.;,· oe January 1973.