PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the American Train Dispatchers Association that:








                      Sun - July 8, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, J. W. Miller


        Wed - July 11, 1979 R. L. Holmgren, J. C. Nondahl, &

        R. R. Koppelman


                      Sat - July 14, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, J. T. Ehlers & J . L. Matolek


        Sun - July 15, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith,

        P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert & J . L.

        Matolek


        Sat - July 21, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson,

        R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach,

        C. D. Finder, J. T. Ehlers &

        J. L. Matolek


                      Sun - July 22, 1979 P. J. Rasmusson, L. R. Smith, J. R. Greene & J . L. Matolek


                      Sat - July 28, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach


                      Sun - July 29, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert, L. L. Nowak & J. L. Matolek

              Award Number 25456 Page 2

              Docket Number TD-24120

              CLAIM X2


Account Chief Train Dispatchers Position being blanked on the following dates not in accordance with A. T.D.A. agreement or any special agreements, by this le claiming 1 days pay at Chief Train Dispatchers rate for the following Train Dispatchers who were available for work on the following dates when the Chief Train Dispatchers Position was blanked and position not filled.
DATE CLAIMANTS
 Sat - Aug 4, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn, P. J.
 Rasmusson, R. L. Graham
 Sun - Aug 5, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith, P. J.
 Rasmusson, J. T. Ehlers
                Sat - Aug 11, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach 6 G. R. Mueller


                Sun - Aug 12, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert, J. L. Matolek


Sat - Aug 18, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn,
 P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F.
 Reidelbach, J. L. Matolek
 Sun - Aug 19, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, L. R. Smith, P. J.
 Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert, R. R. Koppel
 man, J. L. Matolek
 Sat - Aug 25, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, H. J. Bloedorn,
 P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, G. R.
 Mueller, J. R. Greene
 Sun - Aug 26, 1979 E. C. Hilgendorf, P. J. Rasmusson,
 R. R. Koppelman, J. R. Greene, J. L.
 Matolek
              Award Number 25456 Page 3

              Docket Number TD-24120

              CLAIM iii


Account Chief Train Dispatchers Position being blanked on the following dates not in accordance with A. T.D.A. agreement or any special agreements, by this letter am hereby claiming the difference in rate between Chief Train Dispatchers Position and Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers Position for claimant A. J. Troia on the following dates when he was working Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers position and had to absorb the duties of Chief Train Dispatchers Position account being blanked and position not filled.
Sat - July 7, 1979 Sat - July 21, 1979 Sat - Aug 11, 1979
 Sun - July 8, 1979 Sun - July 22, 1979Sun - Aug 12, 1979
Wed - July 11, 1979 Sat - July 28, 1979 Sat - Aug 18, 1979
 Sun - July 29, 1979 Sun - Aug 19, 1979
 Sat - July 14, 1979
 Sun - July 15, 1979 Sat - Aug 4, 1979 Sat - Aug 25, 1979
 Sun - Aug 5, 1979 Sun - Aug 26, 1979
                  CLAIM H4


Account Chief Train Dispatchers position being blanked on the following dates not in accordance with A. T.D.A. agreement or any special agreements, by this letter am hereby claiming 1 days pay at Chief Train Dispatchers rate for the following train dispatchers who were available for work on the following dates when the Chief Train Dispatchers Position was blanked and position not filled.
DATES CLAIMANTS
                Sat - Sept 1, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach, R. R. Koppelman & J. L. Matolek


                Sun - Sept 2, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert, R. R. Koppelman & J. L. Matolek


                Sat - Sept 8, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach, R. R. Koppelman, J. R. Green & J. L. Matolek


Sun - Sept 9, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert,
 R. R. Koppelman, J. R. Green & J. L. Matolek
 Sat - Sept 15, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham,
 W. F. Reidelbach, J. R. Green & J . L. Matolek
              Award Number 25456 Page 4

              Locket Number TD-24120


Sun - Sept 16, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert,
 R. R. Koppelman, J. R. Green & J. L. Matolek
Sat - Sept 22, 1979 H. J. BZoedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, W. F. Reidel
 bach, & J. L. Matolek
Sun - Sept 23, 1979 L. R. Smith, R. L. Ewert, & R. R. Koppelman
Sat - Sept 29, 1979 P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidel
 bach, R. R. Koppelman & J. R. Green
Sun - Sept 30, 1979 P. J. Rasmusson & R. L. Ewert
                  CLASM k5


Account Chief Train Dispatchers position being blanked on the following dates, not in accordance with A. T. D. A. agreement or any special agreements, By this letter am hereby claiming the difference in rate between Chief Train Dispatchers Position and Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers Position for Claimant A. J. Troia on the following dates when he was working Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers position and had to absorb the duties of Chief Train Dispatchers Position account being blanked and position not filled.
Sat - Sept 1, 1979 Sat - Sept 22, 1979
 Sun - Sept 2, 1979 Sun - Sept 23, 1979
 Sat - Sept 8, 1979 Sat - Sept 29, 1979
 Sun - Sept 9, 1979 Sun - Sept 30, 1979
Sat - Sept 15, 1979
 Sun - Sept 16, 1979
                  CLAIM l!6


Account Chief Train Dispatchers position being blanked on the following dates, not in accordance with A. T. D. A. agreement of any special agreements, By t position and Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers position for Claimant A. J. Troia on the following dates when he was working Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers position and had to absorb the duties of Chief Train Dispatchers position account being blanked and position not filled.
              Award Number 25456 Page 5

              Docket Number TD-24120


Sat - Oct 6th 1979 Sat - Oct 20th 1979
 Sun - Oct 7th 1979 Sun - Oct 21st 1979
Sat - Oct 13th 1979 Sat - Oct 27th 1979
 Sun - Oct 14th 1979 Sun - Oct 28th 1979
In addition, claiming 1 Days pay at Chief Train Dispatchers rate for the following Train Dispatchers on the following dates who were available for work and not called to cover Chief Train Dispatchers Position on the following dates when Chief Train Dispatchers position was blanked and po
Sat Oct 6, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham,
              W. F. Reidelbach, G. R. Mueller & J. L. Matolek


Sun Oct 7, 1979 J. C. Nondahl, P. J. Rasmusson, R. R. Koppelman,
 J. R. Greene, & J. L. Matolek
Sat Oct 13, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham,
              W. F. Reidelbach, R. R. Koppelman, J. R. Greene

              & J. L. Matolek


Sun Oct 14, 1979 J. C. Nondahl, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert,
              R. R. Koppelman, G. R. Mueller & J. L. Matolek


Sat Oct 20, 1979 H. J. BZoedron, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham,
              W. F. Reidelbach, G. R. Mueller & J. R. Greene


Sun Oct 21, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert,
              & J. L. Matolek


Sat Oct 27, 1979 J. T. Ehlers, P. J. Rasmusson, W. F. Reidelbach
              & J. L. Matolek


Sun Oct 28, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Ewert &
              J. L. Matolek


                  CLAIM #7


Account Chief Train Disptchers position being blanked on the following dates, not in accordance with A. T.D.A. agreement or any special agreements, by this letter am hereby claiming the difference in rate between Chief Train Dispatchers position and Assistant Chief Train Dispatchers position for Claimant A. J. Troia on the following dates when he was working Asst Chief Train Dispatchers position and had to absorb the duties of Chief Train Dispatchers position account being blanked and position not filled.
 Award Number 25456
 Locket Number TD-24120
Sat Nov 3, 1979
 Sun Nov 4, 1979
Sat Nov 10, 1979
 Sun Nov 11, 1979
=:at Nov 17, 1979
 Sun Nov 18, 1979
Sat Nov 24, 1979
 Sun Nov 25, 1979
Page 6
In addition claiming 1 days pay at Chief Train Dispatchers rate for the following Train Dispatchers on the following dates who were available for work and not called to cover Chief Train Dispatchers position on the following da
              Sat Nov 3, 1979 H. J. Bloedorn, P. J. Rasmusson, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidelbach, & J. L. Matolek


              Sun Nov 4, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmussen, R. L. Ewert


              Sat Nov 10, 1979 H. J. BZoedorn, P. J. Rasmussen, R. L. Graham, G. R. Mueller, J. R. Greene & J. L. Matolek


Sun Nov 11, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmussen, R. L. Ewert, J.
 R. Greene & J. L. Matolek
              Sat Nov 17, 1979 P. J. Rasmussen, R. L. Graham, W. F. Reidel-


bach & J. L. Matolek
1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmussen,
 J. L. Matolek
Sun Nov 18,
R. L. Ewert &
    Sat Nov 24, 1979 H. J. BZoedorn, P. J. Rasmussen, R. L. Graham,

    W. F. Reidelbach & J. L. Matolek


    Sun Nov 25, 1979 L. R. Smith, P. J. Rasmussen, G. R. Mueller &

    J. R. Greene


                    CLAIM ll8


    (a) The Chicago & North Western Transportation Company (hereinafter referred to as "the Carrier"), violated and continues to violate its Train Dispatchers' schedule working conditions Agreement, including:


      (1)Rules 5(d), 5(e), 11, 13 and 14(b)(1) thereof, and

          section 2 of the Memorandum Agreement attached thereto

          as Appendix "E", when it failed to fill the Chief Train

          Dispatcher position in its Butler, Wisc. office on the

          Saturdays and Sundays on and after December 1, 1979 and

          instead combined that position with the first shift

          Assistant Chief Train Dispatcher position on such dates; and

                    Award Number 25456 Page 7

                    Locket Number TD-24120


          (2) Rules 5(d) and 11 when it failed to compensate Claimant

          A. J. Troia at the rate of Chief Train Dispatcher position

          for service performed on the combined Chief Train Dispatcher

          First trick Assistant Chief Train Dispatcher position on the

          shifts referred to in sub-paragraph (Z) above.


    (b) Because of said violations the Carrier shall now compensate:


              (1) The Guaranteed Assigned Dispatcher in the Butler, Wis. office, if available, one (1) days compensation at the rate applicable to the Chief Train Dispatchers position, for each shift referred to in sub-paragraph (a)(1) above;


              (2) Claimant A. J. Troia the difference between one (1) days compensation at the rate applicable to the Chief Train Dispatcher position and that previously allowed for each shift referred to in sub-paragraph (a)(1) above.


        (c) In the event the Guaranteed Assigned Dispatcher referred to in subparagraph (b)(1) above referred to in sub-paragraph (a)(1) above, the claim shall then be payable to the senior qualified extra train dispatcher available at pro-rata rate in the Butler, Wis. office for such shift or shifts.


        (d) In the event neither the Guaranteed Assigned Dispatcher nor any extra train dispatcher is available for any of the shift or shifts under the circumstances described in paragraphs (b)(1) or (c) above the claim shall then be payable in the order set forth in Rule 14(b)(2) of the agreement.


        (e) The respectively eligible individual claimants entitled to the compensation claimed in paragraphs (b)(1), (c) and (d) herein are readily ascertained from the Carriers records and shall be determined by a joint check thereof.


OPINION OF BOARD: Certain operational changes in Carrier's Lake Shore Division
 resulted in the relocation of dispatching positions from Green
 Bay, Wisconsin to Butler, Wisconsin. Pursuant to an agreement between the parties
 involving this relocation, which was effective July 4, 1979, there was also
 provision for the establishment of a new seven day position at Butler of Assistant
 Chief Train Dispatcher. There was also a guaranteed assigned dispatcher position
 at Butler. The Claims herein are for the two relief days of the Chief Dispatcher's
 position, which were blanked by Carrier since it was Carrier's determination that
 the position only required five days of activity.
              Award Number 25456 Page 8

              Docket Number TD-24120


The relevant rules provide as follows:
                'RULE 1 - SCOPE


The term 'train dispatcher' as used in this agreement shall include all train dispatchers, excepting only one chief train dispatcher in each dispatching office, who will not be required to perform trick train dispatcher's duties.
The provisions of sections (a), (b), and (c), Rule 5, and Rule 6 of this agreement, will apply to chief train dispatchers."

'RULE 5

(a)-REST DAYS-WORK ON REST DAYS

(Sections (a), (b) and (c) of this Rule 5 applies to

Chief Train Dispatchers)


Each regularly assigned train dispatcher will be entitled and required to take two regular assigned days off per week as rest days, except when unavoidable emergency prevents furnishing relief. Such assigned rest days shall be consecutive to the fullest extent possible. Nonconsecutive rest days may be assigned only i instances where consecutive rest days would necessitate working any train dispatcher in excess of five days per week.
A regularly assigned train dispatcher who is required to perform service on the rest days assigned to his position will be paid at rate of time and one-half for service performed on either or both of such rest days.
Extra train dispatchers who are required to work as train dispatcher in excess of five consecutive days shall be paid one and one-half times the basic straight-time rate for work on either or both the sixth or seventh days but shall not have the right to claim work on such sixth or seventh days.
            (b) REST DAYS DURATION


The term 'rest days' as used in section (a) of this Rule 5 means that for a regularly assigned train dispatcher seventy-two hours, and for a regularly assigned relief train dispatcher (who performs five consecutive days' train dispatcher service) fifty-six hours, shall elapse between the time he is required to report on the day preceding his rest days and the time he is required to report on the day following his rest days. These definitions of the term 'rest days' will not apply in case of transfers due to train dispatchers exercising seniority.
                  Award Number 25456 Page 9

                  Docket Number TD-24120


"NOTE: This Rule 5(b) does not apply to Guaranteed Assigned Dispatchers or to 3 or 4 day assignments under Rule 2(c).
          (c) ESTABLISHMENT AND CHANGE OF REST DAYS


    Regularly assigned rest days for each position (including the relief dispatcher positions) will be established and no change therein will be made except as a result of increase or decrease in force or by agreement between the Division Manager and office chairman, such agreement to be approved by the officer in charge of Labor Relations and General Chairman.


                  (d) - RELIEF SERVICE


    Where relief requirements regularly necessitate three or four days relief service per week, relief dispatchers will be employed and regularly assigned and compensated at rate applicable to position worked. When not engaged in dispatching service they will be assigned to such other service as may be directed by the proper supervisory officer and will be paid for such service at rate applicable to trick train dispatchers. Each train dispatcher's position as referred to in section (a) of this Rule 5, including chief train dispatchers' positions, will be considered a 'relief requirement', as referred to herein, except as otherwise agreed to between the officer in charge of Labor Relations and General Chairman, train dispatchers' committee.


Note: This Rule 5(d) will not be applicable in offices having a guaranteed assigned dispatcher position.
        (e) - COMBINING POSITIONS FOR REST DAY RELIEF


    The combining of positions to avoid using relief or extra train dispatchers to provide relief on rest days for established positions will not be permitted except by agreement between Division Manager and office to approval of the officer in charge of Labor Relations and General Chairman."

                    Award Number 25456 Page 10

                    Docket Number TD-24120


Petitioner contends that the Chief Dispatcher's position, like every other dispatcher position, is considered a "relief requirement" under the provisions of Rule 5(d). According to the Organization, this is reinforced by the provisions of Rule 5(e). Thus, it is argued, on the two rest days of the Chief Dispatcher's position, relief must be provided unless the parties agree otherwise. Petitioner asserts in some of the claims herein that the Assistant Chief Dispatcher had to absorb the work of the blanked Chief Dispatcher's position on certain days, in addition to his own duties. Several Awards were cited in support of Petitioner's position, notably 8910, 11778 and 20002.
Carrier argues that there is no evidence in the record that any of the work normally performed by the Chief Dispatcher was performed by any of the Claimants, including the Assistant Chief Dispatcher. In describing the work of the Chief Dispatcher, Carrier notes that it is uniquely that of an Officer and is primarily administrative in nature. In addition Carrier argues that under the Rules it is not required to furnish relief on the Chief Dispatcher's position. The Carrier notes that neither Rule 5(d) nor 5(e) is applicable in view of the clear and specific provisions of the Scope Rule. Further, Carrier contends that even if Rule 5(d) were applicable it would not be so in this instance since there was a guaranteed assigned dispatcher position in this office meeting the requirement of the Note to Rule 5(d).
The Board finds Carrier's position in this dispute to be persuasive. First it is apparent that there was no evidence adduced to indicate that any of the Chief Dispatcher's work was performed by any of the Claimants, including the Assistant Chief Dispatcher. Thus, the Organization's position must be grounded solely on the contractual provisions. The three cases cited by Petitioner involving related circumstances are not in point since they all deal with trick dispatchers and not Chief Dispatchers as in this dispute.
The Agreement herein provides specifically in Rule 1 (Scope) that "The provisions of sections (a), (b), and (c), Rule 5, and Rule 6 of this agreement, will apply to Chief Train Dispatchers." This proviso, repeated under Rule 5, makes it clear that the provisions of Rule 5(d) and (e) relied on by the Organization are not applicable to this dispute. In Award 17704 this Board stated:
        'This Board has repeatedly upheld Carrier's right to blank positions when the incumbent of a position is not available, except when an Agreement rule expressly guarantees that such position be worked ...."


In this dispute we can find no rule support for Petitioner's position and no evidence that any of the functions of the Chief Dispatcher (largely Officer's activities) were performed by any of the Claimants. For the reasons indicated, the Claims must be denied.
                    Award Number 25456 Page 11

                    Docket Number TD-24120


        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 Employe 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


        Claims denied.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


Attest ~f( ~~a°'~ !~'~'
      ' Nancy J. D?iler - Executive Secretary


      Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 23rd day of May 1985.

              CARRIER MEMBERS' CONCURRING OPINION

              TO

              _ AWARD 25456 (DOCKET TD -24120)

              Referee Lieberman


There is nothing in the Labor Member's Dissent that points out any error in Award 25456.
 However, the Dissent ignores the very clear language of the second paragraph of the Scope Rule.and the preface to Rule 5, quoted at Page 8 of the Award, that applies only Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) to the chief train dispatcher position. To contend that the provisions of Rule 5(d) and (e) equally apply to- chief train dispatcher positions because they are included in the generic term "train dispatcher" ignores the clear language adopted by the parties. Such argument also ignores the many decisions supporting contract language that the position of chief train dispatcher is different from trick train dispatcher positions.
 The contention that "relief requirements depend solely on the number of positions to be relieved, ^'i thn:Llt rp~,garl to t+a naefic of the service," ignores reality and the fact that a guaranteed assigned dispatcher
 position had been established for "(w)hen relief requirements " were
 needed.
 The Award is correct and the Dissent does not substantiate any error.

                            P. V._Varg


                          -W .~//F~'- u r


                            96

                            M. W. Fingeat


                                ._w , - ,


                          J E. Yost

LABOR Mh?IPER'S ANSWER

to Carrier Members' Concurring Opinion to

Award 25456 (Docket TD-24120)

Referee Lieberman


It is regrettable that the Carrier Members, in their zeal to rebut the Labor Member's Dissent to Award 25456, found it necessary to utilize wording which falls somewhat short of the exact truth. It is also perplexing, since the correct fact as a minimum, average grammar school reading skills.

      The undersigned writer is referring to the statement:


      "However, the Dissent ignores the very clear language of the second paragraph of the Scope Rule and the preface to Rule 5, guoted at Page 8 of the Award, that applies only Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) to the chief train dispatcher position."


The second paragraph of the Scope Rule (Rule 1) and the preface to Rule 5, do =o use the four words attributed by the Carrier Members, "chief train dispatcher position". Plainly, these Rules go use the three words, "chief train dispatchers". The Labor Member's Dissent was designed to demonstrate the majority's misapprehension of the critical distinction between the quoted terms.

 In the third paragraph of their Concurring Opinion, the Carrier Members argue that the contention that "relief requirements depend solely on the number of positions of the service", ignores reality. These quoted words are almost the exact words appearing in the Hoa varying only in use of synonyms or syntax, but not in meaning. That is the reality.

 As for the third paragraph reference to a guaranteed assigned dispatcher position, since that issue in Award 25456, it seems out of place and therefore merits no consideration. We deduce the reference
                          I, '


                          R. J. Irvin, Labor Member


July 11, 1985