NATIOKAL RAILROAD AD.roSTKaT BOARD
THII:D DIVISION Docket Humber SG21850
Herbert L. Marx, Jr., Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE: ( .
(Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company
STATOT OF CLAIM: °Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood
of Railroad Signalmen on the Louisville and
Nashville Railroad Companyy:
On behalf of Signal Maintainer R. T. Harris for transfer
allowances and expenses pursuant to Article VIII of the November 16,
1971 Agrement to cover his change of residence during the week of
June 2, 1975, from Athens, Alabama, to Lewisburg, Tennessee." Carrier
file: G-278-12, 6278,
OPINION CF
HOARD: Claimant was displaced iron his position as
Signal. Maintainer at Athens, Alabama, by a
formr Leading Signal Maintainer owing to the abolishment of the
latter's position. As a result, Claimant exercised his rights to
obtain a position at Lewisbnrg, Tennessee.
Pursuant to this action, Claimant seeks transfer allowance
and expenses as provided under Article VIII of the National Mediation
Agreement of November 16, 1971., which reads as follows:
"When a carrier makes a technological,
operational, or organizational change requiring an
employee to transfer to a new point of employment
requiring him to move his residence, such transfer
and change of residence shall be subject to the
benefits contained in Sections 10 and 11 of the
Washington Job Protection Agreement, notwithstanding
anything to the contrary contained in said provisions,
except that the employee shall be granted 5 working
0
days it f 'two working days'.provided in Section
s)
of said Agreemnt; and in addition to such
benefits the employee shall receive a transfer allow
ance of $400. Under this provision, change of resi
dence shall not be considered 'required' if the
reporting point to which the employee is changed is
not more than 30 miles from his former reporting
point.°
Award Number 22147
Docket Number SG-21850
Page 2
In Award No.
20665
(Bdgett) the Board dealt with a virtually
identical situation in which the Board denied the Claim, since the
employe involved was not directly affected by the Carrier's action but
was -- as in this case--- affected only in a secondary manner as the
result of the exercise of seniority rights by another employe.
The Board seen no distinctive elements in the present dispute
to distinguish it from Award No.
20665.
Nor does the Board, upon review,
find any reason to revise its conclusions reached therein.
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.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
ATTEST:
P"444==-
NATIOYMAL RAILROAD ADJOSTWNT HOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of July 1978.