Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 36388
Docket No. CL-36992
03-3-01-3-605
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Organization (GL-12774) that:
1. The Carrier violated the rules of the parties' Agreement made
effective September 1, 1976 and revisions thereto, particularly
Rules 4-A-1, 4-A-4, 8-H-1 among other applicable rules, as well as
Appendix E, Extra List Agreement, when on June 27, 29, 2000 it
called and utilized the services of a junior employee on position of
Lead Baggage Clerk, Symbol No. LZl located at New York City,
New York, Penn Station, Mail, Baggage and Express Department,
instead of calling and using senior qualified, available employee
Paul Boehme on the Lead Baggage Clerk position.
2. The Carrier shall be required to compensate senior, qualified,
available employee Paul Boehme for eight (8) hours at time and
one-half rate each day June 27 and 29, 2000 account of the
prescribed violation."
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.
The Board has reviewed the record and the numerous prior Awards submitted
by each party. As a result of that review, the Board has concluded that the
Form 1 Award No. 36388
Page 2 Docket No. CL-36992
03-3-01-3-605
Organization has failed to demonstrate just bow the Carrier has violated the current
Agreement by appointing Mr. Malloy, a regular assigned Baggageman, to the Lead
Baggageman vacancy on July 27 and 29, 2000, instead of the Claimant. The Board is
aware that the Organization is basically relying on the fact that the Claimant is more
senior than Malloy. Consequently, be should have been assigned the position in
question, even though he would have been paid on a time and one-half basis. Malloy
was paid on a straight time basis.
The Board has decided in the past that vacancies of partially excepted positions
can be filled by the Carrier on other than a seniority basis. The Board can find no
Agreement Rules that were violated by what took place in this instance. Because one
can find an Award in this industry on every side of every issue, more is required to
justify sustaining a claim than a Public Law Board Award, as was the basis for the
Organization's claim in this instance. The specific contract language that applies and
how it was violated by the Carrier is essential to support a sustaining Award. That is
not present in this case.
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.