(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE: ( , (The Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company

(s) Carrier violated the current Signalmea's Agreement, as amended, particularly the Scope, when it required and/or permitted Seven Trees Company of Spanish Fork, Utah, to cut and remove trees from the signal pole line near Mile Post 693 on the Westward Track on Monday, October 13, Tuesday, October 14 and Wednesday, October 15, 1980.

 (b) Carrier should now be required to compensate Signal Foreman S. S. Argyle and Assistant Signalmen S. L. Smith, D. G. Madsen, R. C. Roller, M. W. Speakman and P. L. Rivers for 24 hours pay each at their regular rate of pay."

 OPINION OF BOARD: The trees involved in this dispute were located on
 private property adjoining Carrier's right of way.
 Some of the trees were about seventy-five feet tall with trunks measuring
 two to three feet in diameter. Branches of the trees spread out over the
 pole line of the Carrier. In consultation between Carrier supervisory per
 sonnel and the owner of the property it was decided the Carrier would have
 the trees cut down and piled an the owner's property for his disposal.

 Acting on these arrangements the Carrier contracted the work to the Seven Trees Company which performed the work in normal daylight working hours during the period October 13-15, 1980.







The Organization has not submitted any proof that the work of clearing brush and removing trees is exclusively reserved to signalmen under the agreement. In conferences on the property between representatives of the Organisation and admitted that other crafts also do this kind of work. The Signalmea representatives admitted that there would have been no complaint if the work hod been performed by employee covered by the Maintenance of clay working agreement or the working agreement of the Telephone and Telegraph Maintenance employee.

 The issues in this case are closely related to those involved in Third Division Award No. 23904 and we quote therefrom as follows:

        "in our review of this cases we concur with Carrier's position. The pivotal question before this Board is whether the scope Rule covered the disputed nark. Close reading of the Sigaelman's Agreement indicates that it embraces the maintenance of pole line signal circuits, but the work performed on the aforesaid dates does not app such maintenance. Trees and brush are obviously not part and parcel of signal pole lines and before pole line maiateaance can be firmly established, it is ne demonstrate that trees and brush grew into the pole lines and intexterred with or endangered signal operations. Since Claimants have not share that these contingencies were present srhea the other employee performed the work, we are constrained by the facts of record to deny the claim."


        FINDINGS: The Third Division o! the Adjustment Hoard, upon the whole record and ell 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 Aetj as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement vas not violated.


                          A W A R D


        Claim denied.

NATIONAL RAILROAD AWUSTK99T HOARD
 By Order of Third Division
 ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad A ustment Bo

 337
        semarie Hxsach - Administrative Assistant


Dieted at Chicago Illin~ois., this 5th day o? January 183.