Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32801
Docket No. SG-33531
98-3-96-3-1114
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
James E. Yost when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Chesapeake &
( Ohio Railway Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claims on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the CSX Transportation Company (C&O):
A. Claim on behalf of T.P. Brady for payment of six hours at the
straight time rate, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement S-069-87, when it
used other than covered employees to perform wiring work for a case
installed as part of the signal system at Worthville, Kentucky, and
deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's
File No. 15 (95-277). General Chairman's File No. 95-339-C&O. BRS
File Case No. 10172-C&O.
B. Claim on behalf of J.B. McDonie for payment of 12 hours at the
straight time rate and five hours at the time and one-half rate, account
Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the
Scope Rule and Agreement S-069-87, when it used other than covered
employees to perform wiring work for a case installed as part of the signal
system at Worthville. Kentucky, and deprived the Claimant of the
opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File No. 15 (95-279). General
Chairman's File No. 95-340-C&O. BRS File Case No. 10173-C&O.
C. Claim on behalf of G.W. Peterson for payment of four hours at
the time and one-half rate, account Carrier violated the current
Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement S-
Form 1 Award No. 32801
Page 2 Docket No. SG-33531
98-3-96-3-1114
069-87, when it used other than covered employees to perform wiring work
for a case installed as part of the signal system at Brookwood, Alabama,
and deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform that work.
Carrier's File No. 15 (96-47). General Chairman's File No. 95-367-C&O.
BRS File Case No. 10174-C&O.
D. Claim on behalf of G.W. Peterson for payment of two hours at
the time and one-half rate, account Carrier violated the current
Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement 5069-87, when it used other than co
for a case installed as part of the signal system at Brookwood, Alabama,
and deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform that work.
Carrier's File No. 15 (96-48). General Chairman's File No. 95-371-C&O.
BRS File Case No. 10175-C&O.
E. Claim on behalf of G.W. Peterson for payment of 12 hours at the
time and one-half rate, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement S-069-87, when it
used other than covered employees to perform wiring work for a case
installed as part of the signal system at Palmetto, Georgia, and deprived
the Claimant of the opportunity to perform that work. Carrier's File No.
15 (96-49). General Chairman's File No. 95-381-C&O. BRS File Case No.
10176-C&O.
F. Claim on behalf of J.B. McDonie for payment of 20 hours at the
time and one-half rate, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement S-069-87, when it
used other than covered employees to perform wiring work for a case
installed as part of the signal system at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. and
deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's
File No. 15 (96-50). General Chairman's File No. 96-07-SS. BRS File
Case No. 10177-C&O.
G. Claim on behalf of G.W. Peterson for payment of 20 hours at the
time and one-half rate, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule and Agreement S-069-87, when it
used other than covered employees to perform wiring work for a case
Form 1 Award No. 32801
Page 3 Docket No. SG-33531
98-3-96-3-1114
installed as part of the signal system at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and
deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's
File No. 15 (96-51). General Chairman's File No. 96-10-SS. BRS File
Case No. 10178-C&O."
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.
This dispute contests Carrier's right to purchase from a manufacturer pre-wired
Harmon VIa.C racks used in equipment cases being fitted up by Signal Shop employees
for installation in the signal system.
The Organization contends that the wiring
of
the racks should have been
performed by Signal Department personnel.
Carrier denies that its purchase
of
pre-wired Harmon VHLC racks violated the
Agreement, and points out that there is no Rule prohibiting the purchase
of
pre-wired
racks for installation in equipment cases. Upon delivery to Carrier's property, Signal
Department employees installed the racks in equipment cases.
The Organization, as the moving party, had the burden of proving that the
purchase violated its Agreement. It failed to carry that burden as it presented no Rule
to support its contention.
On the other hand, Carrier presented numerous Awards of this Board holding
that the purchase of pre-fabricated equipment does not violate the Scope Rule or any
Form 1 Award No. 32801
Page 4 Docket No. SG-33531
98-3-96-3-1114
other Rules of Agreement account Agreement rights to the work do not attach to the
work until the equipment is delivered and Carrier takes possession thereof. See Third
Division Awards 32402, 32290, 32092, 32091, 32058, 32057, 28276, 21232, 20936, 20414;
Public Law Board No. 2044, Award 4; Public Law Board No. 1719; and Public Law
Board No. 1499, Award 1.
The claims have no Agreement support and must be denied
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.