NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MW-22429
James F. Scearce, Referee
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company
( (Pacific Lines)
STATEMENT OF CIAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
that:
(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned track
work in connection with a grade separation project to outside forces
(Cariier's Files MofW 152-815 and MofW 152-816).
(2) The Carrier also violated Article IV of the May 17, 1968
National Agreement when it did not give the General Chairman advance
written notice of its intention to contract said work.
(3) As a consequence of the aforesaid violation, furloughed
Laborers S. Ponce, R. Zaragoza, L. G. Rodriguez, M. C. Castaneda,
J. B. Magana, R. G. Montalvo, C. V. Garcia, M. G. Fernandez, J. C, Villaruel,
I. Majarro, S. Canchola, S. Partida, R. N. Macias, H. H. Cabada, M. C. Franco,
R. F. Romo, L. M. Rios, A. A. Veliz, M. B. Enriquez, J. Gaona and
C. V. Parade each be allowed pay at their respective rates for an equal
proportionate share of the total number of hours expended by outside forces."
OPINION OF BOARD: The essence of the extensive case and arguments
presented by the parties goes to the question of what,
if any, responsibility issues to the Carrier to notify the Organization in
advance of work performed in connection with a grade separation project
and whether or not members of the Carrier's furloughed work force, repre
sented by the Organization, were entitled to perform such work.
Article IV of the applicable Agreement deals with "Contracting Out"
and requires that, inter alia:
"In the event a carrier plans to contract out work within
the scope of the applicable schedule agreement, the carrier
shall notify the General Chairman of the organization
involved in writing as far in advance of the date of the
contracting transaction
as is practicable and in any event
not less than 15 days prior thereto."
Award Nurzcer 2=783
Docket DTutaber .`"1J-224.29
According to the Carrier, no obligation exists here because the work
i--volved was both for the benefit of the City of Los Angeles (the construction
of an underpass) and paid for by the City. Thus, the Car-.ier asserts, it
could
=of
con:.=act cut that over which it did not have control,
We find the Carrier's defense to this claim fails on a very
:Tortant -- and decisive -- point: while it may well be that the and
result of this project was the underpass, for which the Ci=y assur..ed all
costs involved, the co^struction
or
the trackage
in
question was strictly
a=d s i,-gular1y for use of --he Carrier. Moreover, the right-of-caay was the
property of the Carrier; it seers apparent t=at the Ca^ier had to agree to`
the grade separation as well as the method by which such work, includithe shoofly and that the subse
others -- would be accomplished on its property. COr.SeGLently, we conclude
that such decision was
wi`hin
t:^.e authority of the Carrier, as ev=d2nce by
the Contracts betwe°-.^. Carrier and the O:LIliCipality in the record. He also
c-Cli:Ce that,. based on t^e torego7.-a, the work as set Cut _= the Cla - was
w~r:i :1C^a11y a^d ~T~all~l -,error=ed b~ t=:e - a^d _-
r
traC_~ Or-ces .hat p_=o=
not=c°_ should ^a'7e`Deen given under Art_Ole _..
iie shall order that the parties review such work with'_n 94 1a,7s
tra.,. the date o= this Award and __'_ such time frame shall agree
L:JC.^.
-J-ape nsati0n for the Claiua nts as specified in this Cla'-'1. Any such
co=ensation may be Offset by wages received by the Clai.:ants d-_==g the
.,her=od involved. Should the parties be unable to resolve such ;..attars,
__ shall be returned to this Board =or final settlement.
-=IVG3: The hind Division of the Adjustment Board, a?on the whole racct_
and ail the evidence, finds arid holds:
That- the oar-Z4 _s waived oral hearing;
hat t°_ Carrier and the E=loyes -involved
_n
this dis-oure are
rss-cect4_7e17 Care=er a... t.a.D10yes within the =ea=_n5
of
^t%e ~all'Way labor
, a: anprOVed 7u-a 21, 1 93L. ;
7hat this Division of the Adjustment Board has , risdi,cticn over
_'2
==spi:te involved ..,ore n; and
7'at tae iSr=ement '.has V:OlataC.
Award Number 22783 Page 3
Docket Number b&1-22429
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of March 1980.