NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

THIRD DIVISION

Irwin M. Lieberman, Referee

PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

Award Number 20945
Docket Number MW-20941

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee

(Chicago and North Western Transportation Company



(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned or otherwise permitted outside forces to perform construction and repair work on the elevator track at Ashton, Iowa (System File 81-19-82).

(2) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned or otherwise permitted outside forces to repair the "Old Elevator Track" and the "Manning Track" at St. James, Minnesota (System File 81-19-83).

(3) The Carrier also violated Article IV of the May 17, 1968 National Agreement when it did not give the General Chairman advance written notice of its intention to contract said work,

(4) Section Foreman W. E. Olson, Laborers R, T. Schvebach, A. D. Chronister and Machine Operator C. Orimmius each be allowed pay at their respective rates for an equal proportionate share of the total number of manhours expended by outside forces in performing the work described in Part (1).e

(5) Section Forman L. Tetz1off, Laborers E. Press, D. Anderson and R. Fowler each be allowed peer at their respective rates for an equal proportionate share of the total number of man-hours expended by outside forces in performing the work described in Part (2).

OPINION OF BOARD: The disputes herein are identical in all important
aspects with those considered recently by this Board,
involving the same parties, in Award -20895. In this dispute again
the Organization presented a prima facie case in support of its Claims;
the Carrier's defense was predicated on the allegation that the property
on which the work had been performed was leased to certain industries.
Petitioner, in letters dated November 27, 1973 stated, inter alia:
'However Mr. Hellem has not submitted s co of the alleged lease arc e
meat in support of his contentions. With its rebuttal statement to s
Board on April 7, 1975 the Carrier for the first time supplied copies of
the leases it referred to in the handling on the property. Obviously,
such material cannot now be considered (see Awards 19724 and 20588 among
others). Since the burden of proof to support en affirmative defense



rested with Carrier and Carrier was obviously asked to furnish copies of the leases, Carrier has failed to perfect its defense just as it did in the previous dispute alluded to above. Since there appears to be a bona fide lease arrangement, we are at a loss to understand Carrier's failure to present the required documents; bowever, under the circumstances, we have no choice but to affirm the Organization's position, as we did in Award 20895.





That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June u, 1934;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and





        Claim snatainpd.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTIMT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: G/~i &*Zgol

      eSecretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of January 1976.