Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32168
Docket No. CL-32649
97-3-95-3-581
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Elizabeth C. Wesman when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Seaboard Coast
( Line Railroad Company)
,STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Organization (GL-11187) that:
1. Carrier violated the Agreement on June 18, 1994, when it
failed or refused to make a bona fide effort to call Claimant
R. D. Chambers (619112) to protect Position No. 250.
2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant eight (8) hours' pay
at the applicable overtime rate for the violation."
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 Award No. 32168
Page 2 Docket No. CL-32649
97-3-95-3-581
The facts
of
this case are not in dispute. On June 18, 1994, Claimant was working
a 7:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. position in the Customer Service Center (CSC) in Carrier's
facility at Jacksonville, Florida. On that date a vacancy arose in the CSC on Position
No. 250, working 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M., for which Claimant was qualified and
available. At 3:00 P.M., Claimant was relieved by another employee and left to go
home. At 3:15 P.M., Carrier called Claimant at his work location and received no
answer. At 3:16 P.M. the Caller telephoned Claimant's residence and received no
answer. At that point, the Caller bypassed Claimant and called the next employee. As
a result, an employee junior to Claimant filled the position in question.
On June 18, the Organization filed a claim in which it contended that Claimant
was entitled to a two hour call and should have been contacted long before his tour of
duty ended at 3:00 P.M. In its denial
of
the claim, Carrier stated:
"Their (sic) is no rule in the SCL Agreement that addresses when to call
an employee who has left work. The Carrier's needs require filling a
vacancy as soon as possible. When the caller is unable to contact an
employee for work, that employee is bypassed and the next employee is
called."
It is the position
of
the Organization that the Carrier did not make a bona fide
attempt to notify Claimant
of
the pending overtime work opportunity. Accordingly, the
Carrier, because
of
its negligence violated Rule 18(d)(3)
of
the Agreement, which
provides that the senior qualified available regularly assigned employee shall be used
to fill a vacancy. In its May 30, 1995 correspondence on the property, however, the
Organization also stated that it was not contending that the Carrier was negligent, but,
rather, the Organization's claim concerned "whether the Claimant was penalized when
he was not given notification of a work opportunity." The Carrier contends that, in light
of the circumstances - many positions vacant and numerous employees to be called
the Caller did his best to staff the vacancies in a timely manner. It notes that, while it
is unfortunate that Claimant was neither at work nor at home when he was called, that
does not per se indicate negligence on the part of the Carrier.
In a case precisely on point with the instant dispute, the Board found in Third
Division Award 29181 that the Carrier was not in violation of the applicable Agreement
when it happened to telephone Claimant while the latter was somewhere in transit
between his work and bis home. As in that case, there is no indication that the Claimant
Form I Award No. 32168
Page 3 Docket No. CL-32649
97-3-95-3-581
here could have been expected to be at home "momentarily." Therefore, it was
reasonable for Carrier's Caller to proceed to the neat and more junior employee.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration
of
the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Claimants) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order
of
Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day
of
August 1997.