PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6399
BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES )
Case No. 5
and )
Award No. 5
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY )
Martin H. Malin, Chairman & Neutral Member
J. Dodd, Employee Member
D. L. Kerby, Carrier Member
Hearing Date: January 23, 2004
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim on behalf of K. C. Hager for 240 straight time hours and 13.5 overtime hours
worked by Eastern Region seniority district tamper operator T. L. Neal on the Columbus
to Cincinnati main line of the Northern Region seniority district on various dates between
April 8 and May 16, 2002.
(Carrier File: MW-FTW-02-35-LM-186)
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 6399, upon the whole record and all the evidence, fords and holds
that Employee and Carrier are employee and carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
Act, as amended; and, that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute herein; and, that the parties
to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing thereon and did participate therein.
Beginning April 8, 2002, and continuing through May 16, 2002, Carrier assigned a
tamper operator with seniority established on the Eastern Seniority Region and who had no
seniority on the Northern Seniority Region to perform work on the Columbus to Cincinnati main
line within the Northern Seniority Region. Claimant holds seniority on the Northern Seniority
Region.
Our holdings in Case No. 2, Award No. 2 control the instant case. In Case No. 2, Award
No. 2, we held that Rule 18 authorizes transfers across seniority boundaries for temporary
service. We further held that transfers that last up to thirty days in duration are presumptively for
temporary service while transfers that last more than thirty days in duration are presumptively
suspect. In the latter case, Carrier must come forward and demonstrate why such a transfer was
for temporary service despite its duration.
As in Case No. 2, Award No. 2, we are presented with a transfer that lasted more than
thirty days in duration. In Case No. 2, Award No. 2, Carrier came forward with an explanation
that we accepted because it was not contested on the property. The record in the instant case
contains no explanation that would justify a conclusion that the transfer was for temporary
service despite lasting more than thirty days. Accordingly, the claim must be sustained.
Therefore, we turn to the question of remedy. Carrier contends that no monetary remedy
is appropriate because Claimants were fully employed during the period in question. However,
numerous awards establish that where Carrier assigns employees work in derogation of the
seniority rights of the Claimants, the Claimants are entitled to monetary compensation for the lost
work opportunities. Such is the case here.
AWARD
Claim sustained.
ORDER
The Board, having determined that an award favorable to Claimant be made, hereby
orders the Carrier to make the award effective within thirty (30) days following the date two
members of the Board affix their signatures hereto
01,
-AL
Martin H. Malin, Chairman
D. L. Kerby, J. D
Carrier Member Empl Member
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, April 19, 2004.