This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The Organization contends in this case that the Carrier utilized a truck with a gross vehicle weight of 15,000 pounds on a daily basis at American Falls, Idaho, yet did not bulletin a Sectionman Truck Operator position at that location. As a result, the Organization argues, the Claimant was required to accept employment as a Sectionman Truck Driver at Bancroft, Idaho, a position which required her to travel an additional 30 miles to and from her home in Pocatello, Idaho.
In addition, the Organization contends that the parties' "New Truck Driver Agreement," effective August 16, 1993 is applicable in pertinent part as follows:
The Carrier denied the claim on two grounds. First, it argued that the truck at American Falls was utilized fewer than 15 hours per week. Second, it asserted that the vehicle at issue was a pick-up truck. The Carrier argued that there was no provision in the August 1993 Agreement for Sectionman Truck Drivers to be bulletined for the operation of pick-up trucks.
After careful review, the Board finds that the Carrier's defenses are without merit. The Organization submitted a statement from American Falls Section Foreman G. L. Purkey stating that the truck in question was operated 40 hours a week plus overtime. The Carrier's failure to deny or refute that statement is fatal to its unsupported claim that the truck was used on a part-time basis.
Moreover, there is no Agreement support for the Carrier's contention that pickup trucks are excluded from the definition of "trucks" as used in the parties' August 1993 Agreement. Sectionman Truck Driver positions are to be bulletined for the operation of trucks which have a gross vehicle weight in excess of 10,000 pounds. Under the Agreement language, there is a differentiation between vehicles based on weight and not the type of vehicle. In a case involving similar facts, the Board in Public Law Board No. 6302, Award 16 correctly noted: "The express language of the Agreement strongly supports the Organization's position that the dividing line between Sectionman Truck Operator positions and Sectionman positions is the vehicle's gross vehicle weight and not whether the vehicle is a pickup truck."
We conclude that the Organization's claim is meritorious. A Sectionman Truck Driver vacancy existed at American Falls, Idaho, and the Carrier failed to bulletin the vacancy in accordance with the Agreement. The only remaining question is one of remedy. Item two of the Statement of Claim requests that the Sectionman Truck Operator position be bulletined and that the Claimant be awarded compensation for the extra mileage she incurred driving to and from a more distant Carrier location. The Organization maintains that, absent any challenge on the property by the Carrier to the remedy sought, the claim must be sustained. Form 1 Award No. 36159
Generally, the Organization is correct that, in rendering its decision, the Board is confined to the arguments and evidence submitted on the property. However, there is an overriding principle to be considered. Injunctive relief is beyond the authority of the Board, as numerous precedent Awards have recognized. See Third Division Awards 13615, 29695, 30413, 31216, 32939 and Second Division Awards 12597,13008. We would exceed our remedial power by directing the Carrier to bulletin the Sectionman Truck Driver position. If the Board does not have the power to award that injunctive relief, then the lack of authority cannot be overcome, regardless of when the issue was raised.
The request for mileage is equally problematic. There is no indication that the Claimant suffered a loss of earnings as a result of the Carrier's contract violation. The Claimant's travel from her residence to her job reporting location is not compensable under any of the cited Agreement provisions. Therefore, we find that there is no basis in the Agreement for the relief that is requested.
For all the reasons stated above, Item one of the Statement of Claim is sustained; Item two is denied.
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.