Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 31423
Docket No. CL-31062
96-3-93-3-27
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Dana E. Eischen when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International
( Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former
( Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the
Organization (GL-10917) that:
1. Carrier violated the provisions of the Clerks'
Agreement dated November 1, 1982, at Ravenna,
Kentucky, beginning August 14, 1989, when it
contracted out and/or gave work belonging to
the clerical craft to an outside party not
covered under the provisions of said
Agreement.
2. Carrier shall compensate the Senior Available
Employe, extra in preference, eight (8) hours'
pay at the rate of Data Clerk Ravenna,
beginning with the second shift, August 14,
1989, and continuing for each shift thereafter
until stopped.
3. Carrier shall return the work to employes
covered by the Clerical Agreement dated
November 1, 1982."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and ail 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.
Form 1 Award No. 31423
Page 2 Docket No. CL-31062
96-3-93-3-27
Prior to October 1978, the Data Clerk at Ravenna, Kentucky
went to the Riverview Hotel, knocked on doors, and gave T&E crew's
their calls in person. In October 1978, Carrier installed a
railroad maintained phone system in the Riverview Hotel, with the
controlling telephone located on the Crew Callers desk at Ravenna.
Subsequent to that date, and until August 14, 1989, the Crew Caller
at Ravenna would call the rooms and give the crew members their
individual calls.
On August 10, 1989, under Notice 289, the Carrier issued the
following instructions:
"Effective 1700 hours, August 14, 1989 .. the crew
calling functions formerly performed by the crew clerks
at Ravenna, Kentucky for train and engine service
personnel will be performed by the crew dispatchers at
the Crew Management Center
...
Jacksonville, FL . ...
...
Road Crews being housed at Riverview Hotel in Irvine,
Kentucky will be called by the Hotel Clerk by knocking on
the door and relaying the necessary informantion as
received from the callers office in Jacksonville. If for
any reason you are not at your usual calling place as
stated in operating rule 500 it will be your
responsibility to notify the Hotel Clerk or crew caller
in Jacksonville how you will receive your call."
Since mid-August 1989, the desk clerk at the Riverview Hotel has
been knocking on doors and giving the calls to crew members.
The Organization submitted a claim alleging that Carrier .had
violated the Agreement when it "permitted and/or contracted work
belonging to the Clerical organization to be performed by the hotel
clerk at the Riverview Hotel beginning August 14, 1989."
Carrier denied the claim asserting that:
"Effective with the transfer of crew calling duties to
Jacksonville, the Ravenna Crew Caller in the CMC began
calling the hotel clerk who then relayed the call to the
crew members in their rooms. The only difference is that
the Crew Caller gives the information to the hotel clerk
to relay to the crew in lieu of giving it to the crew
members via intercom. A contract clerk is still making
the call and relaying the call information via the hotel
clerk
....
Form 1 Award No. 31423
Page 3 Docket No. CL-31062
96-3-93-3-27
For many years prior to January, 1989 the Carrier's Crew
Callers have left call information with employee's family
members, friends, other employees and hotel clerks at
other locations."
The denied claim was appealed to this Board by Notice of
Intent filed by the Organization, dated January 14, 1993. The
matter was held in abeyance by joint agreement, however, pending
the outcome of another similar claim which eventually was decided
in Third Division Award 29433. Also pertinent is recent decision
Third Division Award 27166, which dealt with esentially the same
issues raised in the present case. Leaving aside arguments raised
belatedly and barred by Circular No. 1, we find nothing in the
present record which justifies a different result than that reached
in Awards 27166 and 29433.
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 21st day of March 1996.