Alfred H. Brent, Referee


      (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The Illinois Central Railroad Company


      STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:


      (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement and Article IV of the National Agreement of May 17, 1968 when, without prior notification to the General Chairman, it assigned weed (System File LA-97-M-70/Case 728 MofW).


      (2) Mr. Lane Hughey be allowed pay at the head operator's rate* and Messrs. E. J. Kling and P. L. Ballard be allowed pay at the wing operator's rate* for a number of hours equal to the number of the number of hours that the contractor's weed spray equipment was used on the Louisiana Division.


      *Straight time rates will be allowed for the time the contractor's equipment was used during the claimants' regularly assigned hours and time and

      s. one-half rates will be allowed for the time the contractor's equipment was used outside of the claimants' regularly assigned hours.


      OPINION OF BOARD: The Organization contends that the Carrier violated the terms

      of the Agreement when it contracted out weed spraying work

      without prior notice to the General Chairman. There is no dispute that the Scope

      Rule covers this category of work. The Carrier concedes that it has equipment

      which is capable of performing the work in question, but contends that it does

      not perform as well as the equipment utilized by the contractor.


      This Board has held that the exclusivity doctrine is of no effect in deciding disputes involving Article IV of the May 17, 1968 Agreement, but has also denied monetary payments where no loss was shown. See Awards 18305 Dugan, 18306 Dugan, 18860 Devine, 18687 Rimer, 18773 Edgett, 18714 Devine, 18716 Devine (involving the same parti 19154 Dugan, 19191 O'Brien, 19399 O'Brien.


      This Board finds that nothing in Article IV changes the rights of the parties to sub-contract out. The Carrier should have given the General Chairman prior notice of its intention. Based on the precedents cited above, this Board concludes that the Agreement was violated, but there were no monetary damages.


i
                Awrrd Ku-ber 19626 Page 2

                Docket !~=ber MW-19526


        FI1tDIITS: The Third Divicion of the Adjuatr:n~v Board, upon the whole record and all tl:c cvidcnce, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing


Shat the Carrier and ti-- Ir~ploycc i:rrolved in this dispute are respectively Cnrricr ^^.·t 1`.:zzploycs within the rrcaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved Jwi-_ 21, l;t;

 That this rivzcion of the Adjust7~nt Board han ,jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        The Agreement was violated.


                      A IT A P J)


        Claim 1 is sustained.


        Claim 2 is denied.


                            ..,n

                          Iw. _?, ."f:T. T,AIL~ _''.J Al)JLJSfIi:1:1' LCAI2D

                          2;,~ Grdc:r c:i "lixrd Division


        ATTEST:^, ,.. L;recit'-e.ivc _.a~_e;,_z`Y


Dated at C:.ic··ro, iilinois, this 27th &:y c,i February 1973.

 i