Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27618
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-27441
88-3-86-3-689
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Herbert L. Marx, Jr., when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks,
(Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:(
(Bessemer and Lake Erie Railroad Company



1. Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement when on May 31 and June 14, 1985, it utilized the services of outsiders to perform janitorial duties reserved exclusively to employes covered by the scope of such agreement;

2. The Carrier shall now compensate Janitors J. Grueser, R. Lukisch, A. DiSalvo and B. Anderson nine (9) hours' pay each at the time and one-half rate of their positions for May 31, 1985, and shall compensate Janitor D. Myers three (3) hours' pay at the time and one-half rate of his position for June 14, 1985."

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 employees 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 had jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.



On August 15, 1982, the Carrier transferred certain employees and work from an office in Pittsburgh and four offices in Greenville to a new general office building in Monroeville. Among those transferred were janitors, who are covered by title in the Organization's Scope Rule (Rule 1). This Rule states in pertinent part as follows:


Form 1 Award No. 27618
Page 2 Docket No. CL-27441
88-3-86-3-689

On May 31 and June 14, 1985, the Carrier employed the services of an outside contractor to perform steam cleaning of its carpeting. The record shows this particular type of overall carpet steam cleaning had not previously been performed at Monroeville. The Carrier further stated during the claims handling procedure that similar work at Pittsburgh and at three of the four Greenville locations had been performed by outside contractors.

As argued by the Organization, the Scope Rule requires there may be no "removal of positions or work" from the covered employees except by agreement.

Here, however, the Organization has failed to demonstrate that the steamcleaning of carpets has janitorial employees. Thus, there is no issue of "removal" of work here. The Carrier reasonably demonstrated that occasional spot cleaning of carpets is of a substantially different nature. Thus, no violation of the Scope Rule is found in these particular circumstances.








                        By Order of Third Division


Attest:
        ancy J. D v - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of November 1988.