Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT 130ARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 36508
Docket No. MW-35598
03-3-99-3-519

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Ann S. Kenis when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
















Form I Award No. 36508
Page 2 Docket No. MW-35598


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.




As Third Party in Interest, the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen was advised of the pendency of this dispute, but chose not to file a Submission with the Board.


There are two claims presently before the Board for determination. The first, MW-5174, involves the Carrier's use of a contractor for site preparation and other assorted sub-ballast work in connection with the installation of a new track structure between Greenwich, Ohio, and Berea, Ohio. The second, MW-5173, involves the incidental brush cutting that was done during the project. The Organization contends that the work in both claims was scope covered and, therefore, advance notice to the General Chairman was required prior to contracting out. The following is the Scope Rule relied upon by the Organization:





Notwithstanding the Organization's argument, we find that the requisite advance notice was given in this case. The Carrier's February 27, 1997 letter to the General

Form 1 Award No. 36508
Page 3 Docket No. MW-35598


Chairman clearly covers the work in dispute and complied with the Agreement's procedural requirements.


Once the Carrier fulfilled its notice obligations under the Scope Rule of the Agreement, the burden shifted to the Organization to request a conference to discuss the proposed work involved in the contracting transaction. It was at that point that the Organization had the opportunity to make its case for using Carrier forces prior to the work being contracted out. There is no evidence that it did so in the matter at hand.


Having failed to perfect its claims by requesting a conference in accordance with the Scope Rule requirements, we must deny the claims in their entirety.


                        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 23rd day of April 2003.