Form 1                 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

Award No. 43929 Docket No. MW-44625 20-3-NRAB-00003-180096

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Meeta A. Bass when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (IBT Rail Conference

PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (

(CSX Transportation, Inc.

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

“Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

(1)     The Agreement was violated when the Carrier assigned Section Machine Operator K. Martin to perform track inspection work between Mile Posts CH 24.0 and CH 99.0 on June 21, 2016 instead of calling and assigning Track Inspector J. Krieger who was qualified and available thereto (System File H46406316/2016208041 CSX).

(2)     As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part (1) above, Claimant J. Krieger shall be compensated six (6) hours at this applicable overtime rate of pay.”

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.

By letter dated June 28, 2016, the Organization submitted a claim on behalf of the Claimant alleging that the Carrier called the claimed against employee to perform track inspection duties in violation of the Agreement. On August 22, 2016, the Carrier denied the claim alleging no violation since the Claimant was not track qualified. The parties conferenced the claim on November 14, 2016. The parties were able to resolve the dispute and the matter is before this Board for final resolution.

The Organization contends that the Carrier violated the Claimant’s seniority rights and his contractual preference to be called and assigned to overtime work. The Organization contends that the Carrier violated the agreement when it failed to assign the Claimant to the overtime on June 21, 2016. The Claimant was regularly assigned, qualifiedandavailabletoperformthework.TheOrganizationarguesthattheClaimant was entitled to overtime due to his seniority and the provision of Rule 17. Rule 17 states that when the Carrier requires overtime services, the senior employee in the required job class will be given preference for overtime work. The Organization contends that agreement references seniority districts not section territories. The Organization maintain that the Carrier violated the Agreement when it failed to give the Claimant preference to perform the claimed track inspection overtime work on his assigned seniority district. It is the position of the Organization that the claim should be sustained.

The Carrier contends that the Organization failed to show a violation of the Agreement. The Carrier arguesthattheClaimant is not qualifiedon the sectionoftrack at issue. The Carrier has established a system-wide practice regarding preference for overtime for employees with the job class that are additionally located in the area. The Carrier citesarbitral precedenttosupportitsposition.TheCarrierassertsthattheJoint Rules Committee Meeting addressed Rule 17 interpretation and verbally agreed that the language of “ordinary and customarily” includes territory ability to determine qualifications. The Carrier argues that past practice and reasonable interpretation of the rule shows location is a factor for qualification. It is the position of the Carrier that the claim should be dismissed.

Applicable Agreement Provisions

The pertinent provisions of the Agreement Between CSX Transportation, Inc. and Its Maintenance of Way Employes Represented by the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes, effective June 1, 1999 are Rule 1, Rule, 3, 4, 11 and 17. These rules are incorporated herein as if fully rewritten.

The Board has carefully reviewed the record to address the Organization’s concerns of a violation of the seniority rights and preference for overtime of the Claimant. It is noted that this issue is not a case of first impression with this Board. See, Simon Awards. The Board concurs with the analysis of Arbitrator Simon and finds no reason to distinguish those awards from the facts presented in this claim. The Board therefore finds that the Organization hasfailed to meet its burden of proof. The claimed against employee was properly assigned overtime in accordance with Rule 17 and the system -wide practice regarding overtime.

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 5th day of March 2020.