i
I
i
I
i
i
Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THI6~" DIVISION
Award No. 37290
Docket No. SG-36884
04-3-01-3-450
The Third Division consisted ol'the regular members and in addition Referee
Robert Perkovich when award was reidered.
(Brotherhobd of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE: ( I
(The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
I
"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the B rlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
Co. (former Santa Fe Railroad):
Claim on behalf of F. M. Klinger, K. D. Dawson and M. J. Carner
for 18 hours at the time and one-half rate. Account Carrier violated
the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope Rule,
when on May 9 and 10, 2 00 Carrier used outside contractors
(Underground Piercing, Inc.) to bore and install conduit at a
highway crossing in Little Falls, MN. Carrier's action deprived the
Claimants of the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File
No. 34-00-0023. General Chairman's File No. TC-19-2000. BRS
File Case No. 11753-BN)."
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 Iwithin the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21,1934.
I
I
I
Form 1 Award No. 37290
Page 2 Docket No. SG-36884
04-3-01-3-050
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 Claimants were assigned to the Little Falls, Minnesota, signal crew when,
on May 9 and 10, 2000 the Carrier retained an outside contractor to use
hydropower technology to bore PVC pipe.
We find that the claim must be denied. The Board already held that the
parties' Agreement does not reserve the work in question to the Organization. (See
e.g., Third Division Awards 24538 and 32796). Moreover, the Organization's
attempts to distinguish those Awards by asserting that the facts in those cases are
distinguishable does not alter the fundamental contractual conclusion reached.
Thus, we will follow that precedent.
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 17th day of November 2004.