Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 37783
Docket No. CL-37073
06-3-02-3-33
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Edwin H. Benn when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE
:
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Seaboard Coast Line
(Railroad
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Union that:
(Carrier File 6(00-1291)
(TCU File 1.2384(18)SCL)
1. Carrier violated the Agreement(s) on July 24, 2000, when it
allowed Clerk E. R Novotnik, to make Yard Inventory
Adjustments (YSIA) on train/track/cut at Cumberland,
Maryland. This violation was performed in lieu of allowing
this work to be performed by Clerical employees in the
Customer Service Center at Jacksonville, Florida.
2. Carrier shall now compensate the Senior Available Employe,
extra or unassigned in preference, eight (8) hours at the
applicable rate of $147.14 or the punitive rate, if applicable, for
the above violation less any compensation paid."
FINDINGS
:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that:
Form 1 Award No. 37783 _,,
Page 2 Docket No. CL-37073
06-3-02-3-33
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.
In this claim, the Organization alleges that the Carrier assigned Clerks at
Cumberland, Maryland, to use the YSIA function to make yard inventory
adjustments rather than assigning that work to a Customer Service Representative
("CSR") at the Customer Service Center ("CSC") in Jacksonville, Florida.
The background for this claim is set forth in Third Division Awards 37227
and 37760.
As more fully set forth in Third Division Award 37760, the Board has
jurisdiction to resolve this claim.
The record in this case shows that the disputed work: (1) was performed by
someone other than a CSR at the CSC; (2) was performed by a Clerk at
Cumberland, Maryland, prior to the 1991 Implementing Agreement; and (3) was
performed by a CSR at the CSC after the 1991 Implementing Agreement took
effect. Under the three-part test set forth in Third Division Award 37227, the
Organization has shown that the work was transferred from Cumberland,
Maryland, to the CSC under the terms of the 1991 Implementing Agreement and
was later improperly performed by someone other than a CSR at the CSC in
violation of the parties' Collective Bargaining Agreements.
Under the rationale stated in Third Division Award 37227, this claim shall be
sustained at the $15.00 requirement.
AWARD
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings. 'r'
Form 1 Award No. 37783
Page 3 Docket No. CL-37073
06-3-02-3-33
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders
that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) be made. The Carrier is ordered to make
the Award effective on or before 30 days following the postmark date the Award is
transmitted to the parties.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of May 2006.
CARRIER MEMBERS' DISSENT
TO
THIRD DIVISION AWARDS 37781, 37782, 37783, 37784, 37785, 37786, 37787, 37788,
37789, 37790, 37799, 37800, 37801, 37802, 37803
DOCKETS CL-37043, CL-37052, CL-37073, CL-37076, CL-37078, CL-37080,
CL-37081, CL-37082, CL-37091, CL-37096, CL-37036, CL-37045, CL-37047,
CL-37055, CL-37063
(Referee Edwin H. Benn)
These Awards involve the performance of various computer functions, including
adjusting yard inventory, at field locations by Clerks and Yardmasters.
We dissent on the ground that the Board lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to decide
the claims. For the sake of brevity, our Dissent to Third Division Awards 37760 through
37765 is incorporated herein by reference.
ire. .e
/YI"4^ */.
Martin W. Fingerhut
,BR. v4.
June 21, 2006
LABOR MEMBER'S RESPONSE
TO
CARRIER IIMEMBER'S DISSENT
TO
THIRD DIVISION AWARDS 37781, 37782 37783, 37784, 37785, 37786, 37787,37788,37789,
37790,37799,37800,37800,37801,37802,37803
DOCKETS CL-37043, CL-37052, CL-37073, CL-37076, CL-37078, CL-37080, CL-37081,
CL-37082, CL-37091, CL-37096, CL-37036, CL-37045, CL-37047, CL-37055,
CL-37063
(Referee Edwin $ Benn)
The Carrier Member's Dissent to the aforementioned Awards is a reiteration of its previous
Dissent involving the performance of computer functions at field locations by non-covered
employees. The redundant Dissent is still without substance and adds no value. Its only saving
grace is its brevity.
Contrary to the Carrier's assertions and illogical arguments the history of these disputes
reflects the fact that the Carrierhas repeatedly lost identical cases before four different distinguished
arbitrators. It is time for the Carrier to accept its loss, pay the grievances and cease violating the
Collective Bargaining Agreement
All of the Awards listed above are correct and precedential. The Carrier Member's Dissent
does not detract from their validity.
Respectfully submitted,
William R Mi11er
TCU Labor Member
June 21, 2006