PARTIES THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
THE STATEN ISLAND RAPID TRANSIT RAILWAY COMPANY
AWARD IN DOCKET N0. 914

STATEMENT
OF CLAIM: 1. Carrier violated the agreement between the parties
hereto when on August 29 1955, it caused., permitted and re
quired train service employees not covered by the Telegraphers
Agreement to report the arrival and departure of trains from
Cranford Junction and Arlington, which work was and is reserved
solely to employees covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement.
2. Carrier be required to permit a joint check of its
records to determine the number of violations occurring sub
sequent to the foregoing date.
3. Carrier be required to compensate the senior idle
telegrapher (extra in preference) for one days pay (8 hours)
on the date shown above, and all subsequent dates on which
joint check of records shown agreement to have been violated.



The record reveals that the Local Chairman and a representative of management made a joint check of the communications work at Cranford Junction after the yard clerk came on duty at about 8 P.M. on March 5 and 69 19569 and check was also made of book record of trains at Arlington Yard about March 7, 1956. The facts set forth in that joint check are quite typical of the operation conducted on the North Shore Sub-division.

It would serve no purpose to here set forth in detail the type of communications shown on the joint check. Suffice it to say that none of the telephone conversations shown indicated that there was any block operator's duties performed by trainmen operating on that sub-division. Further, the inspection of the Dispatchers train sheets shows that no record of arrival or departure times was kept. At Arlington Yard the book record of trains shows time when crews go on duty, consist report and time when train leaves the yard. When crews call the yardmaster no record of location or time is kept. From an over-all examination of the entire joint check it is apparent that train movements from Cranford Junction to Arlington are conducted as a yard operation and that the telephone conversations between yard clerks and dispatchers and crews and dispatchers were informative but not essential for


the purpose of giving trains orders or clearances. Under the circumstances, we find that there is no basis for a sustaining Award



          Claims (1), (2), (3) Denied.


                  /s/ Francis J. Robertson

                  Francis J. Ro ertson,

                  Chairman


/s/ B. N. Kinkead /s/ T. S. Woods
B. N. Kinkead$ T. S. Woods,
Employe Member (Dissenting)- Carrier Member

Dated at Baltimore, Maryland this 23rd day of August, 1957.

..o