Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 35816
Docket No. MW-33165
01-3-96-3-589
The Third Division consisted
of
the regular members and in addition Referee Edwin
H. Benn 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 Carrierassigned B&B Zone Gang
forces (Heavy Bridge Gang) to perform district mechanic duties
(installing awnings) at the Latrobe Train Station, Latrobe, Pennsylvania
on January 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25 and 26, 1995 and continuing and
(installed entrance right
of
way gates) at Compit, Mile Post 308, Derry,
RAD Interlocking on January 30, 31, February 1 and 2, 1995 and
continuing, instead
of
assigning District B&B Mechanics J. McGrath, R
Cesarino, J. Guido, J. Bakos and B. E. McCurdy to perform said work
(System Dockets MW-3883 and MW-3884).
2. As a consequence
of
the violations referred to in Part (1) above, District
B&B Mechanics J. McGrath, R Cesarino, J. Guido, J. Bakos and B. E.
McCurdy shall each be allowed ten (10) hours' pay per day at their
respective straight time rates, plus all overtime worked by the B&B Zone
Gang forces (Heavy Bridge Gang) beginning January 16, 1995 and
continuing until the violations cease and they shall each receive credit for
benefit and vacation purposes."
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.
Form 1 Award
No. 35816
Page 2 Docket
No. MW-33165
01-3-96-3-589
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved
herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
On various dates in January and February 1995, the Carrier assigned zone gang forces
on a B&B Heavy Bridge Gang to install awnings or entrance right-of-way gates at various
locations within the Pittsburgh Seniority District. The Claimants are B&B Mechanics on the
Pittsburgh Seniority District and claim the work. The geographical area of the Zone B&B
Heavy Bridge Gang assigned to perform the work included the locations within the Pittsburgh
Seniority District where the disputed work was performed.
The Organization has not carried its burden to demonstrate a violation of the
Agreement. There is nothing in the Agreement cited by the Organization which precludes the
Carrier from assigning this type of B&B work to zone as opposed to district gang forces in a
situation, as here, where the zone gang's geographical area overlaps the district gang's
geographical area. See e.g., Third Division Award 32326 between the parties where, in the
opposite situation, the Organization tiled claim because work was assigned to a district gang
as opposed to an inter-regional gang. The Board denied the claim holding:
"A review of the record convinces us that the Organization has failed to sustain
its burden of proving that any of the cited Rules gives a fully-employed
Inter-regional gang any more of a right to lay the rail in issue than the same
classification of employees within the Subdivision
....
x * a
. . . This Agreement contains no reservation of work concerning the laying of
rail to Inter-regional gangs as opposed to Subdivision gangs
....
s x s.
We find nothing in the provisions of this Agreement delineating the assignment
of work by the specific size of the project or limiting Divisional forces to the
replacement of a designated number of feet of rail . . . ."
That logic holds in this case. Here, the relevant Agreement language also does not
support the work type assignment distinction urged by the Organization.
Form 1 Award No. 35816
Page 3 Docket No. MW-33165
01-3-96-3-589
Third Division Award 30456 cited by the Organization does not change the result. That
case which sustained a claim filed on behalf of division employees (Signalmen) for work
assigned to system employees involved a different carrier and organization where the
governing Rule specifically limited the work of system gangs ("System gangs will be confined
to construction work on new installations, except for necessary maintenance changes in
connection with a construction project, and in emergency cases such as derailments, floods,
snow blockades, fires, and slides"). The dispute in that case was over whether there was an
"emergency" allowing that the Carrier to assign work to system rather than divisional forces
(an emergency was not found). In any event, the relevant consideration for our purposes is the
existence of limiting language in that case concerning assignment of work to system forces,
which the Organization has not shown exists between the parties in this case.
In light of the above, the question of whether the Claimants were qualified to perform
welding work associated with the work assignments is moot.
The claim is 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 14th day of November, 2001.