NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-21041
Joseph A. Sickles, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Central of Georgia Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotheihood of
Railroad 'Signalmen on the Central of Georgia Railway
Company:
On behalf of Leading Signal Maintainer R. F. Stanfield, Macon,
Georgia, for twelve (12) hours overtime on November 24,
1973,
account
Carrier used Signal Foreman B. F. Jones to take the place of another
employee from
7
a.m. until
7
P.m. fcarrier file: SG-20)
OPINION OF BOARD: Rule 1 defines "Signal Foremen" and states that such
individuals may not "...take the place of another
employee."
On November 24,
1973
a crossing signal was damaged by a derailment. Carrier utilized a number of men, including Foreman J
certain work, and Claimant urges that Jones assisted in the actual work,
in violation of Rule 1.
Carrier has pointed out, on the property and to this Board, that
prior to the incident in question, this Claimant had notified Carrier that
he would not be available for duty during the pertinent time.
We are mindful of the series of Awards cited by Claimant that
demonstrate that it is not Carrier's function to differentiate between
claimants or assert that one individual may have a better claim than another.
But, we do not read those Awards as suggesting that Carrier is foreclosed
from showing that a particular individual has no basis for a claim in any
event. This record, considered as a whole, shows that the instant Claimant
had "marked-off" and was not available to be called to perform work. Thus,
the question of whether Jones did or did not perform work is academic in
this particular dispute.
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;
;ward Number 21030 Page 2
Docket Number SG-21041
That the Carrier and the Employes 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 Hoard has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st
dray
of March 1976.
e