Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 31983
Docket No. CL-32448
97-3-95-3-360
The Third Division consisted
of
the regular members and in addition Referee
Edwin H. Berm when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Chicago, Central & Pacific Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim
of
the System Committee
of
the Organization (GL-11157) that:
1. Carrier violated the Clerks Agreement beginning June 9, 1994,
when it failed to properly apply the correct rate
of
pay to a newly
created position.
2. Carrier shall now compensate the occupants
of
the Customer
Service Representative/Crew Caner Positions at Waterloo, Iowa the
difference between the Class II Position and that
of
the Class III
Position, beginning June 9, 1994, and continuing each work day
thereafter."
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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.
Form 1 kward No. 31983
Page 2 Docket No. CL-32448
97-3-95-3-360
On May 27, 1994, the Carrier bulletined a new position
of
Customer Service
RepresentativelCrew Caller at the Centralized Calling Department in Waterloo, Iowa.
In relevant part. the bulletin states:
Qualifications: Must be knowledgeable
of
schedule agreements and
Company rules as they relate to calling and be
familiar with OIS data entry.
Description: (.'all crews, record calling activities in call book, some
OIS duties, and other duties as assigned.
The Carrier bulletined this position at a Class II rate of pay. The Organization
contends it should be paid at the higher Class III rate.
Rule 4 states as follows:
..RU E 4
RATES OF POSITIONS
(c) When there is a sufficient increase or decrease in the duties and
responsibilities of a position or a change in the character of the service
required, the compensation for such position shall be subject to adjustment
to another classification as set forth in Appendix 2.
The pay classes in Appendix 2 state as follows:
Form I Award No. 31983
Page 3 Docket No. CL-32448
97-3-95-3-360
"Non-Operating Employees
All employees other than Train and Engine service and Management
employees shall be classified as follows:
Pay Class
11. Semi-Skilled Labor - A -Includes work requiring skills possessed
by a secondary school graduate.
Ill. Semi-Skilled Labor - f3 - Includes work requiring manipulative and
cognitive skills possessed by a secondary school graduate and generally
exercised in an environment on or about the track structure.
As developed on the property, the Organization argues that the qualifications and
description of the Class II CSR/Crew Caller positions are similar to Class III Customer
Service Representative/OIS/AR positions previously bulletined by the Carrier. The
Carrier asserts that there are significant differences between the two positions.
Specifically, according to the Carrier, the Class
m
CSR/OIS/AR positions handle track
warrants and interact with Dispatchers in regard to train movements and perform
extensive OIS dudes in addition to crew calling. The new Class II CSR/Crew Caller
positions are primarily responsible for crew calling with only peripheral OIS duties
limited to support
of
the regular OIS positions.
The burden is on the Organization to demonstrate that the new Class II
CSR/Crew Caller positions are deserving
of
a Class III rate. That burden has not been
met. Rather, the Carrier demonstrated that the Class II CSR/Crew Caller positions
have decreased duties from the Class In CSR/OIS/AR positions. The Carrier has shown
that the Class II CSR/Crew Callers are primarily responsible for crew calling with only
peripheral OIS duties, whereas the Class Ill CSR/OIS/AR positions have track warrant
duties and interact with Dispatchers in regard to train movements. In our opinion, the
Carrier also demonstrated that the duties described in the bulletin for the new positions
reasonably fall within the Class II classification
of
Semi-Skilled Labor - A.
Form 1 Award No. 31983
Page 4 Docket No. CL-32448
97-3-95-3-360
The Organization's reliance upon Third Division Awards 30551, 30552 and 30553
is not persuasive. Those Awards dealt with different jobs. Here, as developed on the
property, the Organization made comparisons to the Class III CSR/OIS/AR position as
being similar to the Class 11 CSR/Crew Callers. On the property, the Carrier
sufficiently demonstrated decreased duties from the higher rated positions.
Should in the future the Class II CSR/Crew Callers duties change and they begin
to perform the more extensive duties of the Class III CSR/OIS/AR positions or their
duties become such that they can demonstrate that they properly fall within the Class
I11 rating, then those employees will be free to file a claim for the higher rated pay.
However, based on what this Board can properly consider as developed in the record,
there is insufficient evidence for us to conclude that the CSR/Crew Callers were
improperly rated.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDF
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 6th day of May 1997.