NATIONAL RAILWAY LABOR CONFERENCE
1225 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, 0, C. 20029/AREA CODE: 202-059-9220
CHARLES 1. HOPKINS, Jr. Chairman ROBERT BROWN, Vice Chairman
 W. L BURNER, Jr., Director of Research J. F. GRIFFIN, Director of Labor Relations
 D. P. LEE, General Counsel T. F. STRUNCK, Administrator of Disputes Committees


Mr. Robert M. O'Brien
 27 School Street
 Boston, Massachusetts 02108

 Mr. Irwin M. Lieberman
 91 Westover Avenue
 Stamford, Co nnecticut 06902

 Mr. Nicholas H. Zumas
 Suite 505
 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
 Washington, D.C. 20036

 Gentlemen:

 There are attached copies of Awards Nos. 412 and 413, dated December 1, 1977, rendered by Special Board of Adjustment No. 605 established by Article VII of the February 7, 1965 National Agreement.

cc: Chairman - Employes National i/
 Conference Committee (10)
 Messrs:
 Fred J. Kroll
 H. C. Crotty
 R. W. Smith
 E. J. Neal
 S. G. Bishop
 M. B. Frye
 W. Altus, Jr.
 yeyi. J. Berta
 R. R. Quinn, Jr.
 W. F. Euker
 T: F. Strunck
 0. M. BERGE
 p. L. SORAH,JR.
 PRESIDENT SECRCTARY.TR·ASURER
    BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES


                      AFFILIATED WITH THE A.R.L.-G.LD. AND C.L.C.


GEOFFREY N.ZEH GRAND LODGE
 General Counsel 12050 Woodward Avenue
 Detroit. MI 48203

                          April 5, 1979


    Mr. C. E. Henderson, Assistant to

    President

    Brotherhood of Maintenance of

    Way Employes

    704-06 Consumers Building

    220 S. State Street

    Chicago, Illinois 60604


    Dear Sir and Brother:


    Enclosed for your information are letters dated December 6, 1977, January 19 and April 3, 1979, from Mr. J. F. Griffin, relative to Special Board of Adjustment No. 605 Award Nos. 412 through 420.


    A Summary of the above-referenced Awards will be furnished to you with a circular at a later date.


                      Sincerely fratern lly yours,


                          General~


    opeiu-10 Enclosure

                              Award No. 412


                              Case No. CL-112-W


              SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 605


PARTIES ) Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks
 TO ) Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employes
 DISPUTE: ) and
 Union Pacific Railroad Company
 QUESTIONS
 AT ISSUE: (1) Were telegraphers W. E. Nickel and G. V. Warr entitled
 to the benefits of Article V of the February 7, 1965
 Agreement and the benefits of Sections 10 and 11 of the
 Washington Agreement, as a result of mobilization of
 stations (agencies) at Parma, Homedale and Marsing,
 Idaho which was implemented by Dualization - Tripli
 zation & Mobilization Agreement of October 31, 1972?
 (2) Shall the Carrier now be required to compensate
 Claimants W. E. Nickel and G. V. Warr, expenses
 incurred as a result of Carrier's request transfer
 of residence be delayed for sixty (60) days?

 OPINION
 OF BOARD: The basic question to be determined herein is whether or not
 the Dualization, Triplization and Mobilization Agreement of
 October 31, 1972 was an implementing agreement under the
 February 7, 1965 Agreement. Petitioner asserts (and Carrier
 denies) that the two Claimants herein were forced to exercise their seniority
 on a position some 300 or more miles from their prior jobs as a direct result
 of the mobilization of the agencies at Parma, Homedale and Marsing, Idaho.
 Carrier contends that the change was nothing but a normal exercise of seniority
 when their traveling relief positions were abolished, and such abolishnents
 were neither a technological, organizational nor operational change. The final
 move of Claimants was the culmination of a chain of displacements which began
 in 1971.

 The record herein contains unrefuted evidence that the Agreement covering telegraphers in effect prior to February 7, 1965 contained no provisions which restricted the Carrier from consolidating agency stations. In fact, Carrier did indeed consolidate various agencies without agreements. Further, the changes which affected Claimants herein were all confined to the same seniority district.
                                                    a


                                                        MAW


                              Award No. 412


                              Case No. CL-112-W


                      _ 2 _


The interpretations of the February 7, 1965 Agreement specified that implementing agreements would be required under two circumstances:

            "(a) Whenever the proposed change involves the transfer of employee from one seniority district or roster to another, as such seniority districts or rosters existed on February 7, 1965.


            (b) whenever the proposed change, under the agreement in effect prior to February 7, 1965, would not have been permissible without conference and agreement with representatives of the Organizations."


The claimants have advanced an argument with respect to the applicability of Appendix C-1, Protective Agreement Railpax/Amtrak. It is noted that both claimants endorsed settlement and release forms releasing Carrier "from any and all liability relating to losses from home removal."

 It is apparent that Claimants were not entitled to the protective benefits under Article V of the 1965 Agreement in view of the finding with respect to the October 31, 1972 Agreement as not constituting an implementing Agreement. Furthermore, the abolishment of the traveling relief operator positions were neither a technological, organizational or operational change (see Award 167 and others). In view of our conclusion, a number of secondary issues raised in this dispute will not be dealt with.

      The questions at issue are answered in the negative.


                I. M. Lieberman

                Neutral Member


                      ,~ y~sr ~,


                        LL~I 'is 0 ;..i 7


December 1, 1977 l