NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-22831
Martin F. Scheinman, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE;
(Chicago & Illinois Midland Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood
of Railroad Signalmen on the Chicago and Illinois
On behalf of Assistant Signal Maintainers H. J. Neathery, who
has a seniority date of 4-29-74, and J. R. Edmonds II, who has a
seniority date of 5-14-75, for all time and benefits lost beginning
with Friday, March 17, 1978, account their positions at Springfield,
Illinois being abolished effective at the close of business Thursday,
March 16, 1978, as per your Bulletin No. 206 dated March 9, 1978, and
is to continue in full force and effect until both employees are _
returned to service with all rights unimpaired." jCarrier file; MP-BRS-7/
OPINION OF BOARD; Carrier, in Bulletin No. 206, dated March 9, 1978,
announced the abolishment of two Assistant Signal
Maintainer positions effective March 16, 1978. H. J. Neathery and
J. R. Edmonds II held the positions that were abolished.
The Organization claims that the abolishment of the two
positions violated a Letter of Understanding between the parties,
dated June 23, 1976. It asks that Neathery and Edmonds be paid for
all time and benefits lost beginning with Friday, March 17, 1978,
account their positions being abolished effective at the close of
business on Thursday, March 16, 1978.
In May, 1976, Carrier notified General Chairman Woodruff of
`, its decision to discontinue using Company,communication lines Springfield to Pekin and instea
Bell Telephone Company to perform certain functions. The Organization
requested, and received, a meeting to discuss the proposed change.
Those meetings resulted in a Letter of Understanding dated
June 23, 1976. It states:
Award Number 22683 Page 2
"The carrier is agreeable to confirm its verbal assurance
that there will be no force reduction of existing signalmen
employes (*six) due to contracting out this communication
work (approximately 16% - equivalent of one man of the
signalman force), i.e.:
'1. To replace the existing dispatcher line from Shops
to Pekin, including any necessary equipment attached
thereto, with leased facility from Illinois Bell.
2. To replace the existing business line from Shops to
Pekin, including all equipment attached thereto, with
leased facility from Illinois Bell.
3. To replace the existing radio remote line (old message
phone) from Shops to Powertoa, utilizing the existing
leased radio equipment."'
Carrier's decision to abolish the two positions was due to
a loss of business caused by the coal strike of 1977, as well as the
severe weather conditions in the Midwest during the early months of
1977. Carrier claims that the Letter of Understanding of June 23,
1976 does not prohibit it from abolishing positions based on the
circumstances which existed in 1977, e.g., the coal strike and
freezing weather conditions.
It is the position of the Organization that the Letter of
Understanding precludes a force reduction of the six employes named
in the letter for any reason. In its view, Carrier is obligated to
retain Neathery and Edmonds.
The Letter of Understanding of June 23, 1976 is clear on its
face. Its purpose is manifest. The Letter is intended to address
the impact upon signalmen employes caused by communication work being
shifted to Illinois Bell. The Carrier assured the Organization that
there would be "no force reduction of existing signalmen employes (six*)
due to contracting out this communication work." (Emphasis supplied).
The Letter of Understanding was not intended to cover
reductions caused by other factors. Contracting out is its only
concern. It does not address the circumstances raised here. As such,
the Letter of June 23, 1976 cannot be used to limit the Carrier's
decision in this situation. The claim will be denied.
Award Number 22683 Page 3
Docket Number SG-22831
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.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of December 1979.