NATIONAL RAILROAD ADUOSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Locket Number MW-24689
Edward L. Suntrup, Referee
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Detroit, Toledo and Ironton Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned Car Department
forces instead of Bridge and Building Department forces to paint the interior and
exterior of building and install doors at Jackson, Ohio September 15, 1980
through October 11, 1980, both dates inclusive (Carrier's File 8365-1 (116)).
(2) As a consequence of the aforesaid violation, the following
claimants (B&B employes) shall be allowed pay as follows:
Time and
Pro Rata One-Half
C. Hay 160 hrs. 16 hrs.
S. Walker 160 " 32 "
J. L. Elliott 80 "
R.R.Ray 40 "
M. E. Petty 40 hrs.
OPINION OF BOARD: This is a pay claim submitted by the Organization to the Carrier
by letter dated November 12, 1980 for the five (5) Claimants
named in the Statement of Claim. It was alleged by the Organization that certain
painting work performed at the Carrier's Jackson, Ohio Shops was performed by
non-Brotherhood employees in violation of the current Agreement. There is no
evidence in the record by the moving party with respect to the exact type of
interior and exterior painting done on the dates in question by the Carmen. The
Brotherhood filed this claim that the painting included "the interior and exterior
of buildings and hanging doors", the Carrier's contention is that "the majority
of (the) work consisted of painting material racks, mobile and fixed equipment
and safety color coding" in the interior of the buildings at the Jackson Shops,
with an additional twenty-four (24) hours consumed when the same "Shop forces
painted the exterior of several buildings".
With respect to the interior painting, the Board cannot find sufficient
evidence in the record by the moving party to refute the Carrier's position that
such work had not been the exclusive purview of the Brotherhood in the past.
A number of letters in the record suggest that given members of the Brotherhood
or Carmen had or had not performed certain work in the past. Taken by themselves
these letters are not of such probative value to establish exclusivity. Further,
i
7
Award Number 24717 Page 2
Locket Number MW-24689
the Organization places strong reliance on the Scope Rule of the current Agreement.
Numerous Awards of the Board, however, have held that Scope Rules in contracts
represent general, descriptive divisions of labor rather than specific job
functions. (Third Division Awards 14075, 19894 inter alia). With respect to the
exterior painting work in question, it appears, by the admission of the Carrier
itself, that this type of painting may well fall under the aegis of exclusive
past practice. There is nothing in the record, however, to suggest that the
total number of hours at stake when the exterior of the buildings were painted
exceeds twenty-four (24). Each of the five (5) Claimants shall, therefore, be
paid four-point-eight (4.8) hours pro rata pay.
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 violated.
A W A R D
Claim Sustained in accordance with the opinion.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest: -
Nancy . D er - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 9th day of March, 1984.