NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MS-20421
Frederick R. Blackwell, Referee
(Robert L. Coy
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(The New York & Long Branch Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of
the National Railroad Adjustment Hoard, of my inten
tion to file an ex parte submission on (30 days from date of this notice)
covering an unadjusted dispute between me and the New York and Longbranch
Railroad involving the question:
Between the dates of November 28, 1972 and April 19, 1973 I was
a furloughed employee of the New York and Longbranch Railroad, Maintenance
of Way Department. Pursuant to a 1966 Labor-Management Agreement I was
entitled to payment of $433.44 per month guarantee monies. This money
has not been forthcoming and in consequence I am filing this claim.
OPINION OF HOARD: Claimant, Robert L. Coy, comes to this Board with
Statement of Claim as quoted above, seeking contractual
benefits in accordance with these Parties' 1966 Protective Agreement.
Public Law Board No. 1279, Award No. 1, between these same
Parties, had before it as Docket No. MW-836, a claim which reads:
"1. The Carrier violated the provisions of the
Protective Agreement of February 17, 1966
and the Agreements of March 19, 1969 and
December 17, 1970, when at close of work
on November 28, 1972, it abolished the positions of certain protected Track and B&B
employees listed as follows:
*(See Attachment 'A')
2. Carrier shall return these protected employes,
as named, to Carrier's service and compensate
them for all monetary losses sustained, due
to Carrier's violation of these referred-toAgreements. And additionally, all other
employes adversely affected."
*Robert Coy
It is clear that the question brought to this Board, by
Claimant here, has been heard and disposed of by Award No. 1,
Public Law Hoard No. 1279, which stated that:
Award Number 20455 page 2
Docket Number MS-20421
"All of the furloughed employees covered by this
claim were recalled by the Carrier in early 1973, and
additional employees were hired. The record discloses
that Carrier failed to comply with its contractual
commitments with the Organization in connection with
the subject furlough action but the evidence is insufficient to permit the Hoard to now fashion a
detailed remedy. This case is therefore remanded to
the parties for the development of such facts as are
necessary for the determination of the appropriate
remedy. If the parties are unable to arrive at a
settlement on the remedy question, the matter shall
be returned to the Hoard for resolution of this portion
of the dispute."
In order to prevent chaos and multiplicity of appeals, the
claim will be dismissed for the reason that the issue involved concerning
claim here has been determined by Public Law Hoard No. 1279, which is a
tribunal of coordinate jurisdiction with this Division and whose decisions
are likewise final and binding. Therefore, this claim is dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction by this Division.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Hoard, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this dispute
are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway
Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934; and
That this Division lacks jurisdiction of the claim.
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 25th day of October 1974.