Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 35550
Docket No. SG-34539
01-3-98-3-183
The Third Division consisted ot`the regular members and in addition Referee Roy
J. Carvatta when award was rendered.
i(Brotherbood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
i(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad
Signalmen on the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (NRPC-N):
Claim on behalf of C'.C. Carter and T.E. Young for payment of 16 hours
each at the time and one-half' .rate, account Carrier violated the current
Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule, when it used
management employees to perform the covered work of installing
temporary shunt wires in the signal system on July 31 and August 27,
1996, and deprived the Claimant of the opportunity to perform that work.
Carriers File No. NEC-BRS(N)-SD-750. BRS File Case No. 10406
NRPC(N)."
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. 35550
Page 2 Docket No. SG-34539
01-3-98-3-183
The Organization presented a claim contending that the Carrier violated the
Scope Rule when it used two management employees to install temporary shunt wires
in signal track circuits during operating tests conducted on July 31 and August 27,1996.
The Organization contended that this work was reserved to covered employees and
requested that the Claimants be compensated for these violations with payment of 16
hours at the time and one-half rate to each Claimant.
The Carrier contends that the work is not delineated in the Scope Rule.
Moreover, it has not been shown that the work has been performed exclusively by BRSrepresented employees. In fact, the opposite is true; it has been performed by nonagreement employees since 1976, who have been using the Transportation Test Device
since 1988.
The Carrier further contends that the work was not performed on July 31 and
August 27, 1996, as claimed and that even if it had been the Claimants would not be
entitled to payment because they worked on the claim dates.
Inasmuch as the Organization has not refuted the Carrier's contentions we must
deny the claim for failure to meet the burden of proof.
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 24th day of July, 2001.