NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-20348
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Rail
road Signalmen on the Southern Pacific Transportation
Company (former Pacific Electric Railway Company) that:
(a) The Southern Pacific Transportation Company violated the current agreement between the forme
employes represented by the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen effective September 1, 1949 (including
of Article 1, when it allowed Southern Pacific track employes to perform work
on former Pacific Electric Railway property that is recognized as work performed by the Bonder and W
(b) Mr. L. Burns and Mr. C. Quintana be allowed eight (8) hours at
the straUht time rate of compensation for a Bonder and Welder for January 4,
1972. (Carrier's File: SIG 152-301/
OPINION OF BOARD: The Organization on March 1, 1972 filed the instant claim
on behalf of Messrs. Burns and Quintana alleging as
follows:
"On January 4, 1972, the section foreman, of gang in San
Bernardino, used the cutting torch repeatedly in order to
effect proper fit of rails on G Street, San Bernardino
Branch,. Use of cutting torch and all welding on former
Pacific Electric property is and has always been performed
by the Bonder and Welders."
Carrier's final denial of the claim on the property reads as follows:
"This claim was discussed in conference on June 28, 1972.
The facts are that on date of claim track gang went to G
Street to repair a defective rail, bringing with them a
short length of repair rail, which had previously been
torch cut, date and time unknown. Upon arrival, they used
a rail saw to cut out a section of the defective rail of the
same length as the repair rail, and inserted the repair rail.
While the defective rail at G Street was cut by rail saw
rather than torch in this case, if it had been torch cut,
Award Number 20824 ?age 2
Docket Number SG-20348
"such operation could have been accomplished in a few
minutes, and no basis would therefore exist for a
claim in the amount of eight hours.
The claim is therefore denied."
The record shows that the Maintenance of Way Employees have a
third party interest in this dispute. We note that said Organization was
afforded due notice of the pendency of this matter and timely filed
for our consideration a statement of position. The M of W essentially
maintains that a power rail saw was used to cut out a section of defective
rail which then was replaced by a short repair rail of the same length, and
that there was absolutely no rail welding or torch cutting performed.
We have reviewed in detail the facts of record, the positions
of all parties and the many Awards cited. This record simply does not support a finding that the Mai
replacing the defective rail on January 4, 1972. Leaving aside innuendo and
conjecture there is no probative evidence of a factual basis for the instant
claim. Bather, the record supports the conclusion that a power rail saw was
used on the date in question on the former Pacific Electric territory. Given
these facts we are constrained to dismiss the claim.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, 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;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RA1lJibD ADJUSTMENT WARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of September 1975.