Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 37100
Docket No. SG-37014
04-3-01-3-619
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Francis X. Quinn when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Union Pacific Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Union Pacific Railroad Company:
Claim on behalf of J. H. Spiegel for payment of six hours at the time
and one-half rate. Account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly Rule 15, when on September 2, 2000,
Carrier allowed a junior employee to perform overtime work on the
Albert Lee Subdivision. This action deprived the Claimant of the
opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File No. 1246998.
General Chairman's File No. N13-112. BRS File No. 11814-UP:'
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.
Form 1 Award No. 37100
Page 2 Docket No. SG-37014
04-3-01-3-619
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The dispute focuses on who stood for overtime work on a Signal Maintainer's
territory for a trouble call that required immediate attention. There is no
Agreement provision that restricts the Carrier's choice of people who can be called
to meet this immediate need when the incumbent, who is called the assignee, is not
available. The relevant provision in Rule 16A states, "Unless registered absent, the
regular assignee will be called, except when unavailable due to rest
requirements ...." The Rule goes no further. The Carrier contends that it did
attempt to contact the two adjoining Maintainers, which both parties agree is the
customary next step. Seniority is not a governing requirement at this point. The
adjoining Maintainers are the next logical choice. However, they were unavailable.
The dispute is about what to do next. Third Division Award 35639 rejected the
Organization's position and held that management has the prerogative to choose
who will be called.
The Organization's burden of proof is to show that the labor contract
contains language that justifies the claim that the Carrier is deprived of the right to
use its discretion in calling someone to fix the trouble. There is no such language.
The Organization did not prove that the Carrier violated the Agreement.
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 21st day of July 2004.