.INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS
                    * vs


    SEABOARD SYSTEM RAILROAD (L&N)

    (Employer

    *

    CLAIMANTS: Nevels, Sneed, Hodson & Williams

    *

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    BEFORE PUBLIC LAW BOARD


        THOMAS F. CAREY - Neutral Member & Chairman


        ROGER ELMORE - Employee Member

        J. T. WILLIAMS - Carrier Member


    Parties` to the instant dispute were given due notice of the hearing, herein scheduled and held.


    UNION'S STATEMENT OF CLAIM


        That Machinist Frank Starke, Alfred Nevels, John Sneed, T. L. Hudson and W. J. Williams were furloughed at the Seaboard System Railroad's Savannah Shop and subsequently employed in January, 1983, at the Seaboard System Railroad's South Louisville Shops and improperly denied the right to count prior service rendered with Seaboard System Railroad at their former location as qualifying years of service with respect to vacation and personal leave days.


        RELIEF REQUESTED: _


        That if this honorable Board finds the Employees position to be correct, each of the claimants be reimbursed for a loss of all vacation pay and personal leave days resulting from the improper denial of their previous years of service worked at their former location.


    POSITION OF THE CARRIER:


        It is the Carrier's position that the claim is 'not supported by an agreement and should be denied by this Board.

PL(3 1~0·`~4 2
            The Carrier's position will be presented in the following component parts: ,


                  I. There is no agreement under which the Claimants had a right to transfer from the SCL Railroad at Savannah to the L&N Railroad at Louisville.


                  II. There is no agreement under which the Claimants had a right to have their years of service under the SCL Schedule Agreement counted as qualifying years of service for vacation and personal leave days under the L&N Schedule Agreement.


                  III. The Claimants have not been affected by the corporate merger of the SCL and L&N or by any transaction to which New York Dock Conditions are applicable.


                  - IV. The IAM has not met its burden to prove what they claim is supported.by existing agreement rules, and this Hoard has no authority to grant the

      - request for "equitable relief" by imposing new

                  rules.


      FINDINGS


                  The former Louisville & Nashville Railroad (L&N) and the former


      Seaboard Coast Line Railroad formerly merged to become the Seaboard


      System Railroad. The five (5) machinists had been furloughed at


    - the Savannah, Georgia shop of the Seaboard Coast Line (SCL) and were


      subsequently employed at the Louisville, Kentucky shops of the former


      L&N Railroad.


            The Claimants on July 19, 1984 submitted a claim which asserted


      in pertinent part:


            "...we the undersigned contend that the current agreement which it states: An employee with 8 qualifying years of service receives three weeks of vacation and also receives one personal leave day. A employee with seventeen years receives four weeks vacation and qualifies for two personal days.


            "We fully understand that prior to the merger which have taken place, each of the railroads which currently makes up Seaboard Systems Railroad operates on independent agreements. Hut at the same time realize they negotiated a National Agreement as a single unit with regards to vacations, personal days. The qualifications for each of those plus other benefits agreed to between representative for the Rail Carriers and I.A.M. representative for the Organization.

Pl8 N0- 404
                                                          3


        "...it is our contention that to deny us of those years as credit towards qualifying for our vacation and personal days is unfair, unjust and not in line with our controlling agreement." The Shop Superintend-snt -?enied the Claim on August 20, 1984 as follows:


            "In reference to your letter-dated July 19, 1984, which all_ of you. signed,, pertaining to. your vacation rights and'benefits, due to the fact that you'work for Seabbard Systein Railroad Company, even though you were relocating from the old SCL RR Co., to the Old L&N side of the Seaboard Railroad Company. You were hired as new employees.


            "There was no work transfer or agreement made between

            your respective locations or unions.'


            "We here at South Louisville Shops needed craft personnel to fill positions after all of our furloughed personnel in these crafts were called back to work, in your case, machinists. We were made aware of the fact that some furloughed machinists on the Old SCL side of the Seaboard Railroad Company might be interested in filling these positions. Rather than hire personnel from other Railroads or outside the rail

            . industry, we contacted these points where machinists were furloughed and hired a number of you to fill these open positions.


    - " Your reference to the National Mediation agreements

            is not applicable in this case. No National agreement

            has been negotiated, which would let you retain the

            benefits acquired on the Old SCL Railroad and carry

            forward as a new employee on the Old L&N Railroad."

      There is no dispute in the record as to when the five (S) Claimants were employed by SCL or what their Machinists Seniority is in Savannah. Nor is there any dispute as to when they were furloughed by SCL and subsequently employed by L&N.

      What is in dispute is the application of the two separate agreements that the organization has with SCL and L&N and what is the impact, if any, of the merger of the two Railroads on these Agreements.

P l8 (40. 4014
                                                            4


          Both Parties highlight the language of each Agreement in reference to transfers, reduction in force and furloughed employee The Organization argues that even if "separate agreements" were

          --"'"-'to have bearing, the language of each is virtually identical in respect to these aspects of the Agreements. The Carrier stresses that the-Agreements. are-separate and distinct.

        The Board can find no contractual support that either Agreem grants employees transfer rights from SCL to the L&N properties or vice versa. This is not to say, given the "merged" Seaboard Systei Railroad',-that-such a transfer benefit could be mutually beneficia. Rather, it acknowledges that it"is for the Parties and not this

        Board to negotiate such a contractual consolidation. This Board can only adjudicate the Agreement as it finds it.

              The Organization in submitting the original claim on January

        -16, 1985, acknowledges the distinction in the Agreements when it noted:

    ' "Carrier is a single system Railroad, however, it

              has separate working 4greements for each of the former

              Railroads. Both agreements have very similar, non

              conflicting agreements rules which enable furloughed

              employees to transfer to other points of employment,

              yet retain their service rights for qualifying for

              vacations and personal leave days. Additionally, when

              the former Louisville National Railroad and the Sea-

        ' board Coast Line Railroad merged on January 1, 1983, the

        Interstate Commerce Commission set forth protective con

        ditions contained in Finance Docket 28905 (New York Dock). ,

        This protection applies to employees placed in an adverse

        position as a result of the merger, arid 'would apply in

        this instance.

        The fact of the existence of two separate Agreements cannot

        be overlooked or ignored by this Board. It is the language that

P~a uo- 4614 5
    the Parties have selected to express their intent regarding such benefits as transfers that control. Both Agreements still exist as of this writing as distinct documents and specify the employment relationship between the Organization and either the SCL or the L&N Railroad but not the merged system.

          The organization claims that. the protective conditions.

      contained in Finance Docket 28905-(New York Dock) should apply.

      It asserts the failure of the Carrier to count service with the

      SCL as service for the LEN for vacation purposes constitutes an

      adverse effect on'the Claimants. That Claim is not supported in

      the record before this Board. There is no indication that such

      service-was ever combined before the merger or that the two

      facilities in question were to be considered as consolidated

      facilities.

      Absent some showing of an "Implementing Agreement" in which the Parties specifically addressed and resolved the question of prior credit for purposes of vacation eligibility, this Board cannot giant equitable relief by writing'such a Rule. Further, there is no dispositive evidence in the record to support the organization', contention that the five (5) Machinists were furloughed by the SCL and that their work was transferred to another SCL location. Finally, there is no showing that the Claimants were, recalled to service from furlough or that they were directed to report to work at the new,location. No persuasive rebuttal exists in the record to the Company's claim that they were advised of the opening to determine if they were interested and all responded in the affirmative.

Pl.B Na.401y
A W A R D

 This Public Law Hoard, upon the whole record and all ~the evidence, finds and holds:
 :: The Claims of Machinists Starke, Nevels, Sneed, Hudson and Williams that they were denied vacation and personal leave days as a result of being furloughed at the Savannah Shop (SCL) and subsequently being employed as "new" employees at the South -Louisville Shops(L&N) as new employees in January 1984 is NOT -SUSTAINED. for the reasons set forth in the body of this AWARD.

 Thomas F. Carey, Cha'rman
 Neutral Member

 Jericho'; New York
 June 29, 1986

 Roger 6Elmore
 Employee Member

 . T. Williams
 'arrier Member