Form 1                 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

Award No. 43930 Docket No. MW-44626 20-3-NRAB-00003-180097

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 Roadmaster H. Amanda to perform Maintenance of Way Department work transporting employe T. Spires from Gary, Indiana to Watervliet, Michigan on August 11, 2016 instead of calling and assigning Section Gang 5K03 Foreman M. Rust to perform said work (System File H42407516/2016-210021 CSX).

(2)     As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part (1) above, Claimant M. Rust shall be compensated six (6) hours at his 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 August 15, 2016, the Organization submitted a claim on behalf of theClaimantallegingthattheCarrierviolatedtheagreementwhentheCarrierassigned the Roadmaster to transport a Maintenance of Way Employe to his personal residence. By letter dated October 14, 2016, the Carrier denied the claim stating there were no violations of the rules or Agreement. The parties conferenced the claim on November 15, 2016. The parties were unable to resolve the matter, and the claim was advanced. The claim is before this Board for final resolution.

The Organization contends that the transportation of Maintenance of Way Employes is specifically identified as one of these tasks which is reserved to the employees in the Maintenance of Way craft, and is scope-covered work. The Organization argues that the Roadmaster performed the work that is reserved to craft employees in violation of the Agreement. The Organization argues that the Claimant was due the claimed work under the agreement. The Organization further argues that the work of transporting Maintenance of Way employees who are under pay and on duty is historically and customarily performed by other Maintenance of Way employees. Lastly, it is the position of the Organization that the Claim should be allowed.

The Carrier contends that there was no violation of the Agreement. The Carrier argues that the Roadmaster drovethe employee home to his personal residenceafter his shift because the employee did not have his personal vehiclewith him and was no longer permitted to bring his CSX company vehicle home. The Carrier further contends that driving an employee to his personal residence is not scope-covered work nor has the work been performed in the past by BMWE forces. The Carrier also contends that the Organization failed to meet its burden of proof, and satisfy the three requirements to be reserved under the Scope Rule. Moreover the Carrier argues that the disputed number of hours is four (4) and not six (6). Lastly, it is the position of the Carrier that the claim should be denied.

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 the Scope Rule, Rule 1, 3, 4, 11 and 17. These rules are incorporated herein as if fully rewritten.

After review of the submissions, letters, documents, applicable provisions of the Agreement and other matters of record, the Board finds that the Organization failed to establish by substantial probative evidence a violation of the Agreement. The issue presented is whether the transportation of an employee to his personal residence at the end of shift by his manager is reserved to the Maintenance of Way workforce. After careful analysis of the Scope Rule, the Board finds that the transportation of the Claimant to his personal residence at the end of his shift does not fall within the description of the work specified in the rule or customarily or traditionally performed by BMWErepresentedemployees.TheBoardfurtherfindsthattheOrganizationfailed to establish such a past performance of a predecessor railroad. Thus, the Board finds that driving an employee to his personal residence at the end of his shift is not reserved under the Scope Rule or reserved to the BMWE through established practice on property.

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.