As Third Party in Interest, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes was advised of the pendency of this dispute and chose to file a Submission with the Board.
The general principles governing resolution of the brush cutting disputes currently under consideration by the Board are set forth in detail in Third Division Award 35529. In sum, (1) the Organization filing the claim has the burden to demonstrate a violation of the Agreement; (2) brush cutting in general along the Carrier's right-of-way is BMWE scope covered work; (3) the cutting of brush that interferes with signal or communications lines and related equipment is BRS scope covered work; (4) the cutting of brush under the pole line that does not interfere with signal or communications lines and related equipment falls under BMWE Scope Rules; (5) where outside forces are used, the relevant contract provisions governing the use of such forces will be applied and assertions of the need to show exclusive performance of the work will not defeat an Organization's claim; (6) with respect to asserted emergencies, the Carrier has the burden to demonstrate the existence of an emergency, which requires it to show the existence of an unforeseen combination of circumstances that calls for immediate action, but where ordinary track maintenance could have prevented the situation, no emergency exists; (7) where Agreement violations have been demonstrated, adversely affected employees will be made whole at the appropriate contract rate on the basis of lost work opportunities and irrespective of whether the employees were working on the dates of the demonstrated violations; and (8) where violations have been demonstrated, the disputes will be remanded to the parties for determination of the number of hours attributable to the improperly assigned work taking into account the specific type of work involved, with the Board retaining jurisdiction to resolve disputes over remedies.
In this case, the Carrier used an outside contractor to cut and remove brush from under the pole line between MP CA 353.5 and CA 358.0 on the New River Subdivision in order to eliminate ground problems. The Organization stated that the purpose of the work was " . . . to eliminate ground problems by cutting brush from under the pole line ...." A daily brush report from the Supervisor of Signals shows that for November 19, 1997 for CA 356.0 to 356.4 " . . . heavy brush, trees 6 to 12 inches in the line continuously." [Emphasis added.] Form I Award No. 35540
The record sufficiently shows that the brush extended into the signal and communications lines. Cutting brush that interferes with signal or communications lines is BRS scope covered work.
In accord with the principles set forth in these cases, the claim has merit. The Claimants were deprived ol'work opportunities and will accordingly be made whole for those lost opportunities at the appropriate contract rate. The matter is remanded to the parties to determine the number of hours of work performed by the contractor specifically attributable to cutting brush that interfered with signal or communications lines and related equipment exclusive of hours of other general cutting of brush along the right-of-way. The Claimants will be compensated based on those hours.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) be made. The Carrier is ordered to make the Award effective on or before 30 days following the postmark date the Award is transmitted to the parties.