Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 30963
Docket No. MW-29996
95-3-91-3-393
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Edwin H. Benn when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former
( Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the
Brotherhood that:
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier
assigned outside forces to perform track work
(paving road crossings at Mile Posts 27.7,
28.2 and 28.6) in the vicinity of Whitesville,
West Virginia on April 19, 1990 [System File
C-TC-6098/12(90-575) COS].
(2) The Agreement was further violated when the
Carrier failed to timely and properly discuss
the matter with the General Chairman in good
faith prior to contracting out said work as
required by the October 24, 1957 Letter of
Agreement (Appendix "B").
(3) As a consequence of the violations referred to
in Parts (1) and/or (2) above, Trackman D. R.
Venoy shall be allowed eight (8) hours of pay
at his respective pro rata rate."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved
in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.
By claim dated May 8, 1990, the Organization asserted that on
April 19, 1990, contractors paved road crossings at MP 27.7, 28.2
Form 1 Award No. 30963
Page 2 Docket No. MW-29996
95-3-91-3-393
and 28.6 near Whitesville, West Virginia, and further asserted that
claimant, a furloughed employee, could have been used to perform
the work. The Organization also stated in the claim that the
Carrier failed to notify the organization of the contracting out in
accord with Appendix B of the Agreement. With its denial of June
28, 1990, the Carrier tendered a copy of a letter dated April 17,
1990 notifying the Organization of the Carrier's intent to contract
out the work. On the property, the organization did not further
address the notification question.
The October 24, 1957 Letter of Agreement (Appendix B) states,
in part:
(I]t has been the policy of this company to perform
all maintenance of way work covered by the Maintenance of
Way Agreements with maintenance of way forces .... In
each instance where it has been necessary to deviate from
this practice in contracting such work, the Railway
Company has discussed the matter with you as General
Chairman before letting any such work to contract.
We expect to continue this practice in the future ...."
The evidence before us as developed on the property shows that
the Carrier gave the organization notice of its intent to contract
out the work and the organization did not follow through with
respect to requesting any discussions. We can go no further.
After the Carrier pointed out that it gave the Organization notice
of its intent to contract out the work, the Organization did not
further address the notice issue on the property. It is too late
for the Organization to now attack the timing of the notice in its
Submission to this Board. That must be done on the property. The
claim will be denied.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified
above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not
be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of July 1995.