PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 6776
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S )
ASSOCIATION LOCAL NO. 2052 )
AWARD N0.5
and ) CASE NO. 5
THE PITTSBURGH & CONNEAUT )
DOCK CO. )
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Pay D. Carr and J. Szalai 8 hours pay at time and one-half on August 6, 7
and 8, 2001, plus one extra day's pay each date per person for the Carrier's
violation of Section XXV, Paragraph III of the Agreement (Guidelines for
Manning).
FINDINGS:
Public Law Board No. 6776, upon the whole record and all the evidence,
finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act, as amended; that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
herein; and that the parties to the dispute were given due notice of the hearing and
did participate therein.
Operations at the Carrier's dock facility involve the transfer of bulk
commodities such as coal from rail cars to lake vessels and ore between lake vessels
and rail cars for shipment inland. On August 6, 7 and 8, 2001, coal became trapped
in the No. 2 silo when the feeders became plugged during a loading operation.
Water hoses were used to clear the coal that was stuck. The coal was recovered by
using the No. 2 shiploader, running it over a series of conveyors, and dumping it on
the ground. Dump trucks then hauled it to a stockpile site for storage.
The Organization contends that the coal was "recirculated" within the
meaning of Section XXV, Paragraph III of the Agreement and that Carrier failed to
follow the minimum manning requirements set forth therein. The coal in question
was originally stockpiled on the ground, the Organization submits, and was later
moved by conveyors to the silo. If the coal had not gotten stuck in the silo, it would
have been moved by conveyor belt to a shiploader and dropped into a vessel But
because the coal became stuck in the silo, it was not moved to a vessel. Instead, the
coal went back to the stockpile on the ground. The minimum manning provision for
recirculating coal from the ground to the ground should have been observed under
these circumstances, the Organization maintains.
P. L. B. No. 6776 Award No..5
Page 2 Case No. 5
The Carrier argues that this was a cleaning operation and that the minimum
manning requirements for recirculation do not apply in this instance. Carrier
further asserts that the cited Agreement language is inapplicable because the
operation for recirculating coal is no longer possible due to changes in the system
and equipment. Absent an express contractual limitation, the Carrier maintains
that it has the discretion to staff and direct the work force as appropriate.
Carrier's arguments are not well-founded. The manning provision at issue
stipulates only that coal must move from the ground to the ground to require the
assignment of a recirculating crew. That the coal was in a silo for a time or that it
was recovered from a silo does not change the fact that the coal ended up back on
the ground, without being loaded out.
Moreover, neither the method nor the equipment used to recirculate the coal
is stated in the Agreement. Even crediting the Carrier's assertion that some
equipment that was once used at the dock for recirculation is no longer there, the
Board must apply the Agreement as written. Had the parties intended to eliminate
the manning requirement when certain machinery was eliminated, then presumably
they would have done so. We find that the coal at issue in this case was recirculated
with machinery that still exists, and therefore the Carrier should have assigned the
Claimants to the operation. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier failed to
do so.
Although the Organization seeks two and one-half day's pay for each
Claimant for each day of the violation as a remedy, it offered no explanation on the
property for its request. Under the circumstances, the Board will exercise its
discretion in formulating a reasonable penalty for the lost work opportunity. We
find that the Claimants are to be awarded a basic day in addition to
contemporaneous earnings, if any, for each day the violation of the manning
requirements took place.
AWARD
Claim sustained in accordance with Findings.
ANN S. KENIS
Neutral Member
Carrier Member Organization Member
Douglas Mandalas Richard K. Radek
Dated this day of January, 2005.