STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe 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 dispute herein concerns work performed by two employees assigned to System Force 5X14 on August 26-28, 1989. This work was undertaken on the Spartanburg Subdivision of the Atlanta Division, a location where the Claimants hold District seniority. The work involved had no special system-wide significance and was, as the Carrier stated, "work that any Track Department employee is required to do from time to time." The Organization's view of the claim is as follows:
The Board is not faced here with the question of employees performing work in a seniority district where they have no seniority rights. Thus, no guidance is found in Third Division Award 22072, as cited by the Organization, and similar Awards concerned with seniority rights violations where the work is performed by an employee without seniority standing for the work and/or location. Here, it is conceded that System Force employees and Section Force employees both hold seniority at the involved location. The pertinent question is whether there is any contractual bar to the nature of the work performed by System Force employees, particularly here where it is done during the course of a regular work day. Form 1 Award No. 30222
The Organization argues that work, such as involved here, which is regularly performed by a Section Force cannot be assigned to a System Force. The organization points to Rule 8 (c) covering the establishment of System forces and including the following:
While the organization argues that this listing provides a restriction as to the work which System Forces may be assigned, the Board is not convinced that the provision is intended to describe all the various duties (as contrasted with "positions") which System Forces may perform. In contrast to this, for example, are Third Division Awards 29356, 25053, 21064, and 13776 involving another Organization (Brotherhood of Railroad Signalman) and a similar situation in which there is a specific Rule for guidance. BRS Rule 51 (a) states:
There is no comparable language in the Agreement applicable here.
The organization notes that the Board "has consistently held that work within a specific seniority district must be reserved for employes holding seniority thereon." While the Board again endorses this finding here, it must be recognized that the issue here concerns two groups of employees both of which hold seniority at the point where the work was performed. Absent a contractually defined dividing line between the two groups as to their duties, the Board concludes there is no Rule violation in the assignment of the System Force employees to routine work as part of their regular workweek. This conclusion is limited to the fact circumstances herein: recognition must also be given to the obvious understanding that System Forces are primarily involved in specialized work different from that performed by Section Forces. Form 1 Award No. 30222