Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32788
Docket No. MW-30594
98-3-92-3-357
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Elizabeth C. Wesman when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Consolidated Rail Corporation
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim
of
the System Committee
of
the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier assigned Supervisor
R. Mallet to perform Maintenance of Way work operating the rail
lifter on October 31, 1990 and setting and picking plates on
November 1, 1990 and continuing, while assigned to the tie gang at
E. Conway (System Docket MW-1763).
(2) As a consequence
of
the violations referred to in Part (1) above,
Claimant W. Devlin shall be allowed ten (l0) hours' pay at the
applicable rate for each day the supervisor performed Maintenance
of
Way work beginning October 31. 1990 and continuing."
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.
Form 1 Award No. 32788
Page 2 Docket No. MW-30594
98-3-92-3-357
Parties to said dispute were given due notice
of
hearing thereon.
As Third Party in Interest, the United Railway Supervisors Association (URSA)
was advised
of
the pendency
of
this dispute, but it chose not to file a Submission with the
Board.
On October 31 and November 1,1990, Carrier utilized a URSA Track Supervisor
to instruct employees in their duties, including use
of
a rail lifter. By letter
of
November
4, 1990, the Organization filed a claim alleging that the Carrier had violated the Scope
Rule
of
the Agreement between the Carrier and BMWE. The claim was denied and
subsequently appealed, up to and including conference on the property on January 21,
1991, after which it remained unresolved.
The Board carefully reviewed the evidence in this case. There has been no
showing on the part
of
the Organization that either the Supervisor did the work claimed,
the work he did was encompassed by the Scope Rule, or that Claimant was, in fact,
qualified and available to perform the work claimed.
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 23rd day
of
September 1998.