NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number CL-20665
Joseph A. Sickles, Referee
(Southern Railway Company
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship
( Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and
( Station Employes
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Carrier did not violate the agreement with the
Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks
as alleged by Head Bookkeeper-Clerk Maryanne U. Conlan, office of Cor
porate Accounts, Washington, D. C., in her claim for 8 hours pay at her
time and one-half rate of $27.89 per day effective February 13, 1968,
and continuing for each day thereafter until such time as the alleged
violation ceases to exist. Her claim alleges that Accountant Bruce L.
Kerr "performs clerical work on a daily routine basis which entails
identical duties as performed by Mrs. Conlan, Bookkeepers and Clerks
in the office of corporate accounts." (BRAC file 2961)
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant asserts that Carrier violated the Scope Rule
of the Agreement when it failed to establish a sched
ule clerical position to perform certain work
concerned with
consolidated
systemwide journals and financial statements; but rather assigned the work
to an excepted supervisory employee (Kerr).
Carrier denies that any of the duties performed by Kerr have
been performed by bargaining unit employees. In this regard, Carrier states
that:
"During handling of the claim on the property,
BOAC representatives never stated what specific work
at what specific time and for what amount of time on
any specific date or dates Mr. Kerr alleg<dly performed
work belonging solely and exclusively to claimant or to
other schedule clerks in that o.4~fice. Actually, a comparison of the preponderating duties of r!:e
bookkeeper-clerks (Exhibits 'B' and 'C') with the functions3 scope and responsibilitie-s of the Acco
later Assistant Manager B. L. Kerr provirtes claar and
conclusive evidence of the wide difference between them.
Obviously, no schedule clerical work was assigned to or
was t~.ke.. over or performed by Mr. Kerr. The General
Auditor's letter dated September 5, 1968 to claimant
(Exhibit 'G') sets forth in detail the basic differences
Award Number 20791 Page 2
Docket Eumber CL-20665
"between 'bookkeeping' entries made by schedule clerks and
the 'accounting' entries made by Mr. Kerr, and fully answered and refuted by self-serving allegation
Local Chairman M. U. Conlan's letter of July 8, 1968."
Also, during the protracted handling of the claim
on the property, neither B RAC Local Chairman Conlan (the
claimant) nor any other BRAG representative produced any
evidence or proof to substantiate the self-serving allegations made in the Local Chairman's letter o
and July 8, 1968, nor did they explain how or why the five
cited rules allv_edly were 'violated.' Although asserting
that Mr. Kerr performed clerical work 'which entails identical duties as performed by Mrs. Conlan, B
Clerks', the Local Chairman did not contend that Mr. Kerr
was doing any specific work belonging to or removed from
her, nor any work previously assigned to an existing or
discontinued schedule clerical position."
The Board is of the view that Carrier has properly relied upon a
"burden of proof" defense. We have considered the handling on the property
and are unable to detect that Claimant has submitted to us sufficient information as a basis for a f
This is not to say, in any manner, that this Board is insensitive
to an allegation of a "Scope Rule" Violation. However, the rule in question has been labeled (an
example, Award 19923) and in order to prevail under such a rule, the Organization must supply us wit
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 end all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are
respectively Carrier and Employes within the reaping of the Railway Labor
Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
Award Number 20791 Page 3
Docket Number CL-20665
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction
over the dispute involved herein; and
That the claim be dismissed.
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of July 1975.