NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

Award Number 21112

THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-21085

Joseph A. Sickles, Referee

(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE . t(

The Western Pacific Railroad Company

STATMENT OF CLAIM: Claim o! the General Committee o! the Brotherhood of
Railroad 6igaalm on the Western Pacific Mined
Company that:

(a) The Western Pacific Railroad Camp" violated the apelneat between the campaeqr and its employes represented by the Brotherhood o! Railroad Signalmen, e 1949 (reprinted July 1, 1961) includ. ing revisions and particularly the Scope rule, by diverting long recognized signal work to others who hold no seniority or any other right; under the current Signalmen's Agreement.

(b) The employes named below be compensated for eight (8) hours each at their respective pro rata rate account signal work diverted to A. Teicbert & Sons Inc. as of date of claim: Zdste of initial claim - Acv. 29, 19727

foreman: W. J. Walker

Signalmen: J. W. Hendricks, D. R. Tribble, M. P. Bausch,

M. D. Schooler and D. H. Gifford

Leading Relay Repairman: L. W. Howard

ZC-arrier file:Came No. 9683-1974-BRi87

OPINION OF BOARD: It is asserted that Carrier utilized outside employee
to construct concrete foundations for use in its s4n4l
system, in violation of the Scope Rule:

"This Agreement covers the rates of pay, hours of service and working conditions of all dyes engaged in the construction, reconstruction, installation, repair, reconditioning, inspecting, testing and maintenance, either in signal shops or in the field, of any and all signal systems, car retarders and/or interlocking systems, detector devices connected with signal systems, apparatus and devices in connection therewith, and such other work as is generally recognized as signal work."

Both on the property, and before this Board, the Carrier hap asserted that the facts show that concrete products have been purchased from

Award Nambu. 21112 Page 2

Docket Number SG-21088

outside sources for many years. It also urges that Slgnslmen have no exclusive rights to the typ
The Hoard is of the view that, in order to prevail under the Scope Rule at issue, the employee have a burden of showing that they have acquired the exclusive right to perform the work. We are unable to conclude that the employes have made such a showing under this record.

FIRDaf08: 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 Employes involved is 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 bas jurisdiction over the dispute,involved herein; and

That the claim be dismissed.

A W A R D

Claim dismissed.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

By Order of Third Division

ATTEST: 00
Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago. Illinois, this 29th day of June 1976.