... MOP'File vGS-380-1462
 °- -. - ORT File 1157-54

ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS

and

MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY


Claim of the General Committee of The Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Missouri Pacific Railroad that: >










OPINION OF BOARD: This claim concerns the propriety of the Carrier's action in re
 classifying the position of Agent-Telegrapher at Epps, Louisiana,
 to that of Agent-Restricted Operator, such reclassification occurring on July 22,
 1954, with a corresponding reduction in the hourly rate from $1.83 to $1.66. Request
 is made that the Board order the restoration of the.classification of Agent-Telegrapher
 at said placei together with reparations in :the difference in the hourly rate.

 The Organization contends that the effective agreement was violated by the arbitrary action of the Carrier when it reclassified the position of. Agent-Telegrapher to that of Agent-Restricted operator at Eppsi Louisianar inasmuch as there had .not, in fact, been substantial decreases in the duties and responsibilities of the.position of Agent-Telegrapher at Epps, Louisiana, to the degree contemplated by Rule 2(f-2) to warrant the action taken by the Carrier.

 The Carrier takes the position it is.-not required'to seek an agreement with the Organization prior to the reclassification of positions pursuant to the provisions of Rule 2(f-2), provided there are substantial decreases in the duties and responsibilities of a permanent nature for a reasonable pariod, or to meet substantial.

                                        Award No. 1

                                        Docket No. 1


changed conditions of a permanent nature for a reasonable period affecting the duties and responsibilities of the occupants of such positions. Tt is the further position of the Carrier that the elimination of train order work, and the duties and responsibilities incident thereto, from the position of Agent or Agent-Telegrapher constitutes such substantial decreases or substantial changed conditions of a permanent nature contemplated by Rule 2(f-2).

        Rules relied upon by the parties here were 2(b), 2(c) and Note, 2(d) and

2(f-2), said rules reading as follows:
 "Rule 2. (b) When additional positions are created the rate of pay will be
 fixed,in conformity with positions of the same class as shown in wage
 scale on the seniority district where created, except that in offices
 where two or more telegraphers are employed (not counting the agent or _~_
 agent-telegrapher as one of the two) the rate of pay will not be less
 then the lowest rate in that office."
 "Rule 2. (c) At small non-telegraph or non-telephone agencies it will be
 permissible at the option of the carrier to require the agent to handle,
 Western Union service, railroad communication service confined exclu
 sively to the transmission of car orders and securing reports on the
 probable arrival of trains for bulletin board information. Where such
 service is exacted the classification of the agent will be identified
 as agent-restricted operator and rated $1-365 per hour ($1.49 per hour
 effective Feb. 1, 1951).
 "NOTE: it is agreed that the communication service herein provided for
 does not permit of the handling of train orders and railroad messages
 of record, the OS'ing of trains and other communications ordinarily
 handled as between telegraph operators and telegraph operators and
 dispatchers, except in an emergency; in the latter case the rate of
 pay for that agency for the day shall be the minimum rate for tele.
 graphers on that division,"
 "Rule 2. (d) When agent-telegrapher positions are reclassified to small
 non-telegraph agencies, all railroad telegraph and telephone circuits
 leading to the office and the instruments therein, except such as are
 necessary for purposes and under conditions expressed in section (c)
 hereof, shall be removed from the office within ten days from date of
 reclassification."
 "-Rule 2.-(f-2) The rates of pay, either hourly or monthly herein tabulated,
 are fixed with due regard~to conditions existing as of the.effective date
 of this agreement, but it shall not' preclude the reclassification of
 agents or agent-telegraphers to that of small non-telegraph agents where
 substantial decreases in the duties and responsibilities of -a permanent
 nature continuously accrue for a reasonable period; neither will it pre
 clude the changing in classification of positions and adjustment in rates
 of pay to meet substantial changed conditions of a permanent nature for a
 reasonable period that require increased or decreased duties and responsi
 bilities of employes. Where positions are reclassified rates of pay
 established therefor shall be fixed in conformity with Rule 2-(b) by
 agreement between the parties of this agreement."
                                        Award No. 1

                                        Docket No. 1


The question to be resolved by the Board is whether or not the elimination of train order work in and of itself from the position of Agent-Telegrapher amounts to a substantial decrease in the duties and responsibilities of the position as contemplated by Rule 2(f-2).

 Based upon the facts of record, it is clear that the train order work was, in fact) removed from the position of Agent-Telegrapher at Epps, Louisiana, We believe that the elimination of train order :cork from the position of Agent-Telegrapher did,, in fact, constitute a substantial decrease in the duties and responsibilities of such position within the meaning of Rule 2(f-2) and that the reclassification of such position to that of Agent-Restricted operator was permissible under these facts.

 It is clear from an examination of Rule 2(f-2) that the Carrier may, under these circumstances, properly reclassify the position, but that such rule places a corresponding responsibility upon the parties to negotiate as to the wage rate for the position so reclassified as provided in Rule 2(b).

        FINDINGS; The Special lBoard of Adjustment No. 117, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21; 1934.

 That this Special Board of Adjustment has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and that the Carrier did not violate the effective agreement.

                          AWARD


        Claim denied


                  SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 117


                  L~ivinngstonNSnith - Chairman


                                              P.~

                                              W4''~


C. 0. Griffith -: oye Pember G. W~riso a - Ca-crier menIei·

 St. Louis, Missouri May 29, 1956