Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 36376
Docket No. SG-34745
03-3-98-3-416
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Edwin H. Benn when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Consolidated Rail Corporation
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad
Signalmen on the Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail):
Claim on behalf of L. W. Kramer and M. S. Leister for payment of 56
hours each at the straight time rate, account Carrier violated the current
Sig nalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule, ,when it used
non-covered employees to install equipment for a sliding wheel detector
at Mile Post 240.7 in February of 1997 and deprived the Claimants of the
opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File No. SG-969. General
Chairman's File No. RM2995-01-0697. BRS File No. 10681-CR."
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. 36376
Page 2 Docket No. SG-34745
03-3-98-3-416
As Third Party in Interest, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
was advised of the pendency of this dispute and chose to file a Submission with the
Board.
In February 1997, the Carrier assigned IBEW-represented employees to install
a monitoring and recording device for a sliding wheel detector at Alto Tower. The
sliding wheel detector system is used to detect sliding wheels caused by sticking brakes
and brake tread build up via an infra red heat detection unit. The equipment was
connected to the Automatic Equipment Identification System ("AEI") for the Carrier's
trains traveling down the mountain at Altoona, Pennsylvania. Previously, the detection
work was performed by TCU represented employees by visual and auditory inspection.
The Organization failed to show that the disputed work was connected to the
signal system. The record shows the work was connected to AEI. The Organization
has therefore not shown in this case that the disputed work was scope covered.
The claim shall therefore be 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 18th day of February 2003.