THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 44398 Docket No. MW-43000
21-3-NRAB-00003-190379
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Andria S. Knapp when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division (IBT Rail Conference
(BNSF Railway Company (Former Burlington Northern (Railroad Company)
“Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
The Agreement was violated when the Carrier assigned outside forces (R. J. Corman) to perform Maintenance of Way and Structures Department work (remove and install track panels and related work) at the Bel Fontane Bridge on the Hannibal Subdivision of the Springfield Division on November 12 and 13, 2013 (System File C-14-C100-71/10-14-0099 BNR).
The Agreement was further violated when the Carrier failed to properly notify and confer with the General Chairman regarding the work referred to in Part (1) above or make a good-faith effort to reduce the incidence of subcontracting and increase the use of its Maintenance of Way forces as required by Rule 55 and Appendix Y.
As a consequence of the violations referred to in Parts (1) and/or
(2) above, Claimants J. Clark, G. Henderson, D. Jennings, S. Mohr, G. Nichols, J. Ellingsworth, T. Smith, R. Jarvis, M. Bross,
P. Chapman, L. Sutton, J. Whitehead, R. Guffey, R. Tate and J. Outlaw shall now each ‘... be paid 8 hours straight time, 10 hours over time and 8 hours double time each, at their appropriate rate of pay as settlement of this claim.’” ”
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.
This dispute arose on October 9, 11, 12 and 14, 2013, at the Galesburg Yard in the Chicago Division when a contractor, Tompkins Trucking, used track hoes and semi- trucks with flat-bed trailers to unload cement ties off of rail cars and haul them to an area behind the Hump Tower for eventual use on the New East Way track. The Organization filed a claim by letter dated December 4, 2013. The Organization contends that the Carrier violated Rule 55 of the parties’ Agreement when it failed to provide proper notice of the proposed contracting, and when it contracted out work that has been historically, traditionally and customarily performed by MoW forces, who could have done the work. The Carrier responds that it did provide notice, dated June 2, 2011. Moreover, the work required special equipment. Finally, the work in dispute is part of the larger Galesburg Yard expansion project, which the Carrier properly contracted out, and the Carrier is not required to piecemeal portions of larger projects to its own forces.
Rule 55 requires that work that is customarily, historically and traditionally performed by BMWE-represented forces may only be performed by outside forces when certain criteria are met:
[S]uch work may only be contracted provided that special skills not possessed by the Company’s employes, special equipment not owned by the Company, or special material available only when applied or installed through supplier, are required; or when work is such that the Company is not adequately equipped to handle the work, or when emergency time requirements exist which present undertakings not contemplated by the Agreement and beyond the capacity of the Company's forces.
The notice for the Bellefontaine Bridge project clearly specified the need for specialized equipment that its own forces did not have the skills to operate, and established that the project could properly be contracted out. 1
The Organization argues that the work done by Corman did not require special skills, nor was specialized equipment used. That may be true, but it is well established through Board precedent that the Carrier is not required to piecemeal portions of a large project in order to provide work for its own forces. The work at issue in this claim was indisputably part of the larger Bellefontaine Bridge renewal project, which the Carrier could properly contract out. There being no obligation for the Carrier to piecemeal the work, the claim is denied.
Claim denied.
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 13th day of April 2021.