parties BROTHERHOOD Of RAILROAD BLVNo. is
 to the SIGNALMEN : ~NMB No. 18

 Dispute



BURLINGTON NORTHERN

RAILROAD


STATEMENT OF CLAIM




This case involves a claim by the Organization that Carrier violated the Scope Rule of the current Agreement when it purchased four prewired bungalows for signal installation at Highway Crossings in Missouri. The organization presented an underlined
                                      0 5t95 i~ -1 ~


                            2


copy of the Scope Rule to make its point. That underlined Scope

 Rule is duplicated below:

                          SCOPE


        This agreement governs the rates of pay, hours of service and working conditions of all employees engaged in the construction, reconstruction, reconditioning, installation, reclaiming, maintenance, repair, inspection and tests, either in the signal shop, or in the field of the following:


          A. All automatic block signals and signal

          systems, traffic control systems, train

          stop and train control systems; inter

          locking; cab signal systems; car retarder

          systems; ~jShway ,a"~A L.lroad grade crossing

          protection systems; hot box, broken flange,

          broken wheel, dragging equipment, slide,

          high and wide load, flood or other similar

          detector systems; train order signals;

          take siding, call on, start or dwarf signals,

          power and electrically locked switches,

          spring switches, track occupancy indicators,

          and car counting devices connected to or

          through automatic block or interlocking

          systems.


            8. All appurtenances. devices and e%nipinent used in connection with the s,ystAMs cited in paragraph A. regardless o,ff where located and how operated, and devices covered by the scope of this agreement, as well as any other work generally recognized as signal work.


            C. High and low voltage signai lines, overhead and underground, including poles, cables, cross arms, wires, tie wires, insulators, guy wires, messenger cables, rings, and other fixtures and equipment used in connection therewith, conduits and conduit systems, transformers, arresters, and distributing blocks used in connection with the systems;

                                                SWb-r g


                            3


              devices, or equipment covered by this agreements in sidg~and r tsade wiring of al?. instrument'houses, cases, panels, boards, as well as all cable, whgge used in nnnnertinn with the systems, devices, And mgnt ,covered by the scope of

              this agreement, track bonding, inetaxxa-- -

              tion of all types and kinds of bonds,

              including lightning and static electricity

              bonding: lighting of all instrument houses,

              cases, panels, boards, etc., used in the

              systems and devices covered by the scope

              of this agreement, not including the

              general lighting of interlocking tower

              buildings, shop buildings and common head

              quarter buildings. (Emphasis added)


Quite simply, the organization is proposing that all devices used by the Railroad in connection with the signal system must be wired inside and outside by Railroad Signalmen. It further contends that it makes no difference whether the work in connection with the signal devices is done on or off the property; it must be dine by covered employes (Signalmen). in the final analysis, what the organization is contending is that carrier is in violation of the Scope Rule of the Agreement when it purchased prewired bungalows from an outside vendor and installed them on Company property. That argument is not persuasive. While the Signalmen clearly, by Agreement, have ail of the rights proposed by the organization, once equipment or supplies reach the property, the Scope Rule cannot be extended to restrict Carrier's right to purchase equipment from outside companies.

                                      v 5mm- W


                            a


This issue has arisen many times in the past on this Railroad, as well as on many others. Innumerable arbitration awards on the subject have been rendered. The more reasoned of those awards concludes that carriers do have the right to purchase prewired signal devices from outside vendors. If the parties had agreed at any time in the past that the purchase of prewired signal equipment was a violation of the Scope Rule, their understanding could have easily been so stated in the Agreement. The fact that it is not so stated leads one to the conclusion that the parties never intended that the Scope Rule would be extended to mean prewired equipment could not be purchased. ARAB claim denied.

                      . . Dennis,

                      Neutral Member


    C) xOL6J

                                        4, Wk. 6J


    R.o Naylok~ ~ C.A. M "raw,

    carrier Member Employe Member


Dat ,of Adaptio~