NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-23780
Martin F. Scheinman, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Southern Pacific Transportation
Company (Pacific Lines):
(a) The Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Pacific Lines) has
violated the agreement effective October 1,
1973,
between the Company and the
employee of the Signal Department represented by the Brotherhood of Railroad
Signalmen end particularly Rules
7, 9, 16
and
72.
(b) Mr. T. L. Spangler be allowed additional compensation for fifteen
hours at his overtime rate on April 1,
1979."
(Carrier file: SIG
148-288)
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant T. L. Spangler, at the tame the dispute arose, was
a signalmen assigned to Gang No.
23
et Klamath Falls,
Oregon. J. B. Wisor was a Leading Signalmen assigned to the same gang. On
Sunday, April 1,
1979
J. B. Wisor was called in by Carrier to handle crossing
gate trouble at Viewland, California, resulting in fifteen hours overtime pay.
The Organization argues that Claimant should have been called in on
April 1,
1979
since he was senior in service to Wisor. It claims that Rule
16
supports its contention. In relevant part, Rule
16
states:
"Where gang men are required to work overtime, the
senior man in a class in the gang shall be given
preference to such overtime work."
The Organization argues that "class" in Rule 16 means "seniority class"
and not "classification". It notes that in other places in the agreement "class"
mesas "seniority clew" end that, therefore, the word "clew" should be applied
consistently throughout the agreement.
The Organization also maintains that other Rules in the agreement,
particularly Rules
7, 9
and
72
require that the overtime work should have been
given to Claimant. Therefore, the Organization asks that Claimant be compensated
for fifteen hours at his overtime rate on April 1,
1979.
Carrier, on the other hand, asserts that it did not violate the
Agreement. It points to a number of other Awards on this property which indicate
that "class" in Rule
16
means "classification" and not "seniority class".
Award Number 2+072 Page
2
Docket Number
SG-23780
The Carrier also objects to arty consideration by the Hoard of Rules
other than Rule
16.
It notes that no other Rules allegedly violated were
referred to by the Organization until June 20,
1979,
eighty-two days after the
occurrence.
Furthermore, the Carrier claims that none of these additional Rules
cited by the Organization were viclated. It maintains that none of these Rules
prohibit the assignment of the overtime work to Leading Signalman J. B. Wisor.
First, we are convinced that Rules
7, 9
and
72
are not apposite here.
They simply do not relate to the underlying dispute presented. Thus, the crucial
rule is Rule
16.
After analyzing the evidence and argument presented, we must conclude
that the claim is without merit. As such, we x111 deny it in its entirety.
The same basic 1 sue was decided by this Board in Awards
12668
and
12936.
In those, and several other cases, we have rejected the claims advanced
by the Organization here.
This Board has long held to the view that in the absence of convincing
evidence that an earlier award was palpably erroneous that the earlier award
not be overturned. While the Organization hen raised significant points here,
we are nevertheless persuaded that the Employes have failed to establish that
our earlier holdings were palpably erroneous. In the absence of such proof -
consistent with the time honored doctrine of stare decisis - the claim must
fail. We will deny it in its entirety.
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.
Award Number 24072
Docket Number SG-23780
Page 3
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
BY ~!hff/'~
Roaemarie Breach - Pdminiatrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of December 19Q2.