NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-21103
Irwin M. Lieberman, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Robert W. Blanchette, Richard C. Bond and John H.
( McArthur, Trustees of the Property of
( Perm Central Transportation Company, Debtor
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the former Pennsylvania Railroad
Company:
_Svstem Docket 899
Western Region - Fort Wayne Division Case No. 18-13-73
(A) Claim that on April 16, 1973 the Carrier violated the current CAS Agreement, mainly Article 44 s
Smith a Lead Signalmans job on bulletin #FW-9, thereby causing Mr. L. G.
Sweigard to be furloughed.
(B) Claim L. G. Sweigard bid on the job and should have been
awarded said job.
(C) Claim that according to the C&S Seniority Roster District
#18 dated January 1, 1973 and poated.April 1, 1973, Mr. L. G. Sweigard
has sigaalmans rank #18 with date of February 3, 1970 and Mr. F. D. Smith
has signalmans rank of #19 with date of April 6, 1970.
(D) Claim that Mr. L. G: Sweigard be compensated for all time
lost account of violations stated in (A) and (B) above. Time lost to be
determined jointly by local representative and carrier official.
OPINION OF BOARD: On April 2, 1973 Carrier advertised the position of
Leading Signalman in the Ft. Wayne Division Gang. No
bids were received from employes possessing seniority as Leading Signalmen. Signalman F. D. Smith an
Site Asst. Signalman Helper
F.D. Smith April 6, 1970 April 6, 1970 February 3, 1964
L. G. Sweigard February 3, 1970 August 28, 1968 June 10, 1968
The pertinent provisions of the Agreement provide:
Award Number 21242 Page 2
Docket Number SG-21103
"ARTICLE 4 - SENIORITY AND ASSIGNMENT TO POSITIONS
Section 1 - Seniority classes.
(Effective August 1, 1950) The following groups of employes
shall each constitute a separate seniority class:
(a) Inspectors, Foremen.
(b) Assistant Inspectors, Assistant Foremen.
(Groups (a) and (b) will sometimes
hereinafter be referred to as the
'Foreman Class.')
(c) Leading Maintainers, Leading Signalmen.
(d) Signal Maintainers, Telegraph and Signal
Maintainers, Telegraph and Telephone Maintainers, Signalmen.
(e) Assistant Signalmen.
(f) Helpers."
"Section 3 - Date of other than foremen.
(a) (Effective August 1, 1950) The seniority of employes
covered by Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Article 1 (groups
(c),,(d), (e) and (f) listed in Section 1 of this Article) in a particular class shall begin at the
they acquire an advertised position in that class in
the district in which employed, and they shall acquire
and accumulate seniority in all lower classes.
(b) Temporary service in a higher class shall not establish seniority in that class, except when
and award of a temporary position or vacancy in accordance with Section 20 of this article.
Groups from which employes shall be appointed. to positions
in foreman class
(c) (Effective August 1, 1950) Employes shall be appointed
to positions in the foreman class only from groups
covered by Section 1 (c) and (d) of Article 4, and
they shall retain and continue to accumulate seniority in the classes and in the seniority district
which they held seniority prior to the appointment.
Date of helpers
(d) Helpers shall not acquire seniority rights and their
names shall not be shown on the roster until they have
worked as helpers for six months in any twelve month
Award Number 21242 Page 3
Docket Number SG-21103
period. After having worked six months in any twelve
month period as helpers, their names shall be placed
on the roster with their seniority dating from the
first day counted in calculating the six months'
period."
"Section 18 - Qualifications
(a) Assignments to positions in the leading maintainer,
leading signalman, signal maintainer, T. & S. maintainer, telegraph and telephone maintainer, si
based on ability, fitness and seniority; ability and
fitness being sufficient, seniority shall govern.
(b) Employes covered by this Agreement who possess the
necessary qualifications to plan, direct, lead, regulate and coordinate the work of other employes w
be given consideration for promotion to positions in
the foreman class. When two or more employes do possess the necessary qualifications (referre
preceding sentence of this paragraph) the employe with
the most service in the classes covered by this Agreement shall be selected for promotion to the for
class."
Petitioner's position is that Claimant should have been awarded
the position in question because he holds more signalman seniority than
Smith and signalman seniority rather than helper seniority should prevail.
It is also contended that Smith was awarded the position because he (and
not Claimant) is a protected employe under the Merger Agreement. In essence, it is argued that total
Article 4, for purposes of promotion, and Carrier had no right to use that
standard in this case.
Carrier argues that there is no rule support for Petitioner's
position. Carrier points out that the Agreement has no provision as to
consideration of seniority in lower classes, with the exception of the
Foreman's class, and does not give more weight to Signalman's seniority
than to Helper's seniority for promotions of this type. Carrier takes the
position that since no employes with seniority in the Class bid for the
vacant position, Carrier was free to select anyone for the position; it is
made clear, however, that Carrier did indeed select the employe with the
greatest total seniority under the Agreement.
First it is noted that Article 4 establishes seniority by Class
only. Similar disputes, involving Maintenance of Way employes have been
considered by this Board in the past. The leading case, Award 11587,
states:
Award Number 21242 Page 4
Docket Number SC=21103
"In the Agreement before us we note that in Article 3, Rule
1, it is stated that 'Employee are entitled to comsideration
for positions
is
accordance with their seniority ranking as
provided in these rules.' Immediately following
....
we
find a circumscription which confines system gang employes
seniority rights as to new positions or vacancies to seniority in 'their respective classifications.
the Rules together we conclude that no employe holding seniority in one of the other three groups ha
priority because of such seniority, to be assigned to a permanent position of Steel Bridge Foremen.
Claimant admittedly, had no seniority in the 'B&B Department
Foreman' classification, we will deny the claim."
This case was followed by Awards 20206 and 20085, which held similarly.
Petitioner's point with regard to the Merger Agreement protection
with respect to Smith, although undoubtedly correct, has no relevance to
the dispute per se. The Organization argues by inference that the successful applicant for a promoti
no contractual basis for this position. It is noted, however, that in accordance with Article 4, Sec
must be made from the Leading Maintainere and Leading Signalman and the
next lower class only. There is no comparable language for the position of
Leading Signalman Promotions. It is understandable for the Organization to
presume that promotions should be based on seniority in the next lowest
position; however, the record is barren of facts indicating any practice of
this type in the past and, as indicated heretofore, there is no apparent
rule support for the position. Consequently, the Claim must be denied.
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 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 Board has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was not violated.
Award Number 21242 Page S
Docket Number SG-21103
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of September 1976.