NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Locket Number SG-24838
I. M. Lieberman, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Clinchfield Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Clinchfield Railroad Company:
On behalf of Mr. J. C. Cox, SC&E Assistant, senior cut off SC&E employee,
for forty hours at time and one half rate of pay account contractor (Baker
Constructions) drilling and blasting holes on railroad property between Mile
Post 85.1 and 85.3 for six poles on July 9 and 10, 1981." (Carrier file: 15- .
1(81-1011) RM1)
OPINION OF BOARD: In this dispute Carrier contracted with an outside contractor
for certain work which included drilling and blasting holes
for six poles. The work of removing the rock and setting the poles and lines
was performed by signal forces employed by Carrier. The record, without rebuttal,
indicates that the blasting and drilling operation consumed approximately four
and one half hours. The claim filed by Petitioner is in behalf of a furloughed
signalman and is for forty hours pay at the overtime rate.
It is this Board's view that the work in question clearly falls within
the scope of the signalmen's activities as defined in the Scope Rule of the
Agreement. It is equally clear that there was no need to recall Claimant for
this relatively short span of activity since there were ample employes on the
site who could have been used for the drilling and blasting work. Had the
organization named an employe on the site for damages for the work performed,
the Board may well have taken a different view; however, under the circumstances
it is our opinion that Petitioner named the wrong Claimant. For the reasons
indicated, therefore, the Claim will be sustained, but no monetary damages are
payable.
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:
,' `M
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was violated.
Award Number 25062
Locket Number SC-24838
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.
Page 2
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
~"Z-
_"d-aV~
Nancy J er - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of October 1984.
r
(IV
1984
w.
N
cYo
office,
Labor Member's Concurrance
to
Award Number 25062
Docket No. 24838
It seems that we have come full circle with regard to the
allowance of a remedy.
Early in the history of this Board, Referees awarded remedies
on this basis set out in Award No. 25062. Then, as time passed,
Carriers, by constant protest and characterizing such awards as
windfalls, persuaded certain Referees to refuse the payment of
remedies to any employee who was in simultaneous compensible
employment. Certain Referees would, however, make such awards
to any employee not so employed and petitioners, therefore,
began changing their designees for remedies. Now as stated above,
we seem to be back where we started and where we should have
always been, and the industries employees must be thoroughly
confused.
Since the Referees have established the present confusion,
they should also proceed to remove it. Under these circumstances,
the only feasible way to remove it is to disregard the question
of claimant eligibility entirely. As Referees used to say, what
should it matter to the Carrier who is the beneficiary of an
award so long as the Carrier is not excessively jeopardized?
W. W. Altus, Jr.!
Labor Member