SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 605
PARTIES ) Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
TO ) and
DISPUTE ) Baltimore 6 Ohio Railroad Company
QUESTIONS Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad
AT ISSUE: Signalmen on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company;
(a) Carrier violated Mediation Agreement dated February 7, 1965, when
they furloughed Mr. James T. Gray, Assistant Signalman, on August 26,
1977 (end of tour of duty) through September 9, 1977.
(b) Carrier should not reimburse Mr. Gray for his period of furlough
straight time at straight time rate of pay and all overtime at time
and one half rate of pay.
(Carrier file:2-SG-542)
OPINION OF Claimant, a protected employee, was furloughed from August 26, 1977
THE BOARD: through September 9, 1977. Petitioner argues that in spite of the
emergency situation and the reduction in number of trains, the signal
system remained in service and Claimant could have performed his normal duties
better with the reduced movements, since the signal system remained in service.
It is urged by the Organization that Section 4 of Article I of the February 7,
1965 was violated by the Carrier in the furloughing of Claimant.
Carrier states that the entire situation was caused by a wildcat
strike in the coal fields resulting in a 251 reduction in train movements during
the period in question. Carrier argues that Article IX of the November 16, 1971
National Agreement modified the force reduction provisions of the August 21, 1954
Agreement by deleting that portion of the rule which provided "* * * the work
which would be performed by the employees involved in the force reductions no
longer exists or cannot be performed." Carrier argues that the deletion also
affected the identical language of Article I Section 4 of the February 7, 1965
Agreement.
It is apparent that the November 16, 1971 Agreement could not be
interpreted to modify the 1954 Agreement while leaving intact the identical
provisions in the 1965 Agreement. Such a result would be totally contradictory
and inconsistent. In the instant dispute even though Claimant was a protected
employee he was properly furloughed, in the light of the undenied emergency, in
accordance with the modified force reduction provisions of the Febiuary 7, 1965
Agreement (see Award No. 419 of this Board).
AWARD
Claim denied.
I. M. Lieberman
Neutral Member
Dated:~.~.thT. i"~