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.
On September 18, 1992, the Organization filed a claim alleging that the Carrier violated the Agreement when it hired an outside contractor to dismantle two steel structures on July 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1992. The Organization alleges that sometime prior to July 25, the Claimants were assigned to dismantle the two steel structures, but the Carrier reassigned the Claimants to perform work elsewhere and the outside contractor was then hired to "complete the work." The Organization contends that work of this nature has been customarily and historically performed by B&B subdepartment forces. The Claimants were fully qualified to perform the work in question.
The Carrier denied the claim contending that the Claimants were on duty and under pay and lost no monetary compensation. Moreover, the Carrier argues that it had sold the two steel structures to the outside contractor and that the outside contractor then assumed ownership of any salvageable material, and therefore, there was no violation.
The Board reviewed the evidentiary record and finds that the Organization has not met its burden of proof that the Carrier violated the Agreement. The record reveals that the Carrier no longer owned the steel structures that were dismantled at the time of the alleged violation. The Carrier presented sufficient evidence that the structures had been sold prior to the dismantling work that was performed. The Board has consistently held that once another company acquires the subject property, that new company then controls who operates it and who dismantles it. Therefore, the Carrier is not, by Agreement, obligated to assign the work to Organization-represented employees. See Third Division Awards 30948 and 30838.