Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27328
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-27326
88-2-86-3-435
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John C. Fletcher when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Eastern Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it directed and required
Track Foreman R. P. Boney to assume the duties, responsibilities and work load
of two (2) positions during the vacation absence of Track Foreman L. Johnson
July 8 through 12, 1985 (System File MW-85-108/438-45-A).
(2) Foreman R. P. Boney shall be allowed an additional forty (40)
hours pay at his straight time rate because of the violation referred to in
Part (1) hereof."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The Track Foreman assigned to Extra Gang 125 was absent on vacation
for five days beginning July 8, 1985. While absent, the two laborers and one
laborer driver from Extra Gang 125 were assigned to work with Claimant's Extra
Gang 112. The combined work force, supervised by Claimant during this period
was four employees, two laborers and two laborer drivers.
The Organization processed a Claim for an additional forty hours pay
for Claimant contending that it was improper to "double up track laborers"
into one Gang in this manner. While this Claim was being handled on the property, though, no evidenc
Claimant's case.
Form 1 Award No. 27328
Page 2 Docket No. MW-27326
88-3-86-3-435
In its submission to our Board the organization has submitted some
material in support of its allegations. Also, for the first time, it argues
that the Vacation Agreement was breached when more than twenty-five percent of
the work of a vacationing employee was distributed to a single employee. We
are unable to consider either because both were not included in the on-the-property handling. In Thi
"It is a basic tenet of the Railway Labor Act that all
evidence to support a Claim must be advanced by the
Parties on the property prior to progressing the Claim
to the National Railroad Adjustment Board."
This was not done in this instance and the Claim must be dismissed.
A W A R D
Claim dismissed.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:,gO~//
' Nancy J D er -.Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of August 1988.
LABOR MEMBER'S DISSENT
TO
Award No. 27328 - Docket No. MW-27326
The Majority in this Award determined that, "while this Claim was being
handled on the property, though, no evidence of a probative nature was
submitted to sapport Claimant's case." And that, "also, for the first time,
it argues that the Vacation Agreement was breached when more than
twenty-five percent of the work of a vacationing employee was distributed to
a single employee." It is apparent that the Majority failed to review the
record before the Board and, in fact, ignored the evidence submitted in that
record. Sufficient evidence was presented during the handling of this dis -
pute on the property to allow for a sustaining Award and the General Chairman did raise the issue th
his appeal to the Carrier's highest designated officer but that issue was
thoroughly discussed in the conference. The Majority erred in dismissing
this claim and I, therefore, dissent.
D
D. Bartholomay
Labor Member