Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 36160
Docket No. MW-35786
02-3-99-3-773
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Union Pacific Railroad Company (formerly The Denver
( and Rio Grande Western Railroad Company)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
(1) The Agreement was violated when the Carrier assigned outside
forces (Tuff Shed) to perform Maintenance of Way work
(construction of a utility building) at the Burnham Locomotive Shop
complex in Denver, Colorado beginning June 17 and continuing
through June 23, 1998 (System File D-98-41C/1157515 DRG).
' (2) The Agreement was further violated when the Carrier failed to
meet with the General Chairman regarding its intent to contract out
the work in Part (1) above as required by Appendix D of the
Agreement.
(3) As a consequence of the violations referred to in Parts (1) and/or (2)
above, Claimants D. E. Smith, G. L. Wiese and H. J. Deputy shall
now be compensated at their respective rates of pay for an equal
and proportionate share of all hours worked by the outside forces
in the performance of said work between June 17 and 23, 1998."
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. 36160
Page 2 Docket No. MW-35786
02-3-99-3-773
The Organization relies on Appendix D as related to construction by an outside
firm of a 10' by 12' utility shed for use on the Carrier's property. Appendix D concerns
the Carrier "plans to contract out work within the scope the applicable schedule
agreement" and the requirement to provide 15-day advance notice.
The reliance on Appendix D in this instance is without foundation. The Carrier
purchased the pre-assembled building from a vendor, the arrangements for which
included a warranty under condition that the assembly was performed by the vendor.
Thus, the issue is whether Agreement prohibits the Carrier from the purchase of goods
and equipment; this is readily distinguishable from the contracting of scope-covered
work. The Board finds no Rule support in Appendix D or elsewhere for denial of the
Carrier's right to purchase manufactured goods (in this instance, utility shed) as an
alternative to having such items constructed by its own forces.
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 20th day of August 2002.