y

C AWARD NO. 35

0 NRAB DOCKET N0. OL-8628

P CASE N0. 35

Y 35-1 FILE R-51-760-.9

BRC FILE NR-27-1

SPSNIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 169

PARTIES) The Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks

TO

DISPUTE St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood:

(1) That Carrier is violating the current Clerks? Agreement when it permits Southwestern Transportation Company employes to rate and route ICL shipments at Jonesboro, Arkansas, before the regular assigned Rate Clerk, 3-ir. T. F. Nease, comes on duty on week days and when he is off on Saturday.

(2) That Mr. T. F. Nease be paid for one (1) hour at the overtime rate of his position for each of his work days Monday through Friday, March 22 through September 8~ 1954, and be paid for two (2) hours, on the same basis, from September 9. 1954, and until violation is corrected.

(3) That Mr. Nease be paid for four (4) hours at the overtime.rate for each Saturday from March 22, 1954, until violation is corrected.

FINDINGS: Under the facts as presented in this case, the work of giving informa

tion out as to rates and routing was not work that exclusively belonged

to the claimant.

Claim denied.

s/ Frank P. D)u-laql

Frank P..Douglass, Chairman

Ls 6'l. E. Straubinr~er /s /-L. C. Albert
W. E. Straubinger, Employee Idember L. C. Albert, Carrier Member
(Dissent attached)
Tyler, Texas
April 24, 1957.

C

0

P

Y EMPLOYEE MHERIS DISSENT TO ANARD N0. 35

The entire itFindings" of this Award are brief and state:

itUnder the facts as presented in this case, the work of giving information out as to rates and routing was not work that exclusively beIon.-ed to the Claimant.4

From the reasoning of Chairman Frank P. Douglass in this Award, as well as others rendered by him, he gives the erroneous impression that work covered by the Scope of the Clerical Agreement can be performed with impunity by officials and employees not covered by the Agreement. Rate Clerk T. F. Nease was assigned by bulletin to perform the following duties:

-?Briefly, duties consist of checking LCL and CL rates, revising and pro-ing waybills, filing freight tariffs and billing freight.qt

On pa.-e 3 of its Oral Argument, Carrier stated:
~1He (Claimant Nease) also uses tariffs for other purposes to such
extent as he may be required to do so by the Agent. This includes
using tariffs to develop information as to proper rates-for use of
a shipper. Because of his familiarity with the tariffs, ~e often
performs this function , but the fact remains that he may not prevent
· others from using the tariffs for the same purpose. The Agent could
not confer upon him right to exclusive use of the tariffs.-,
(emphasis supplied)
Third Division Award 6101, Referee Paul G. Jasper, held:
"Even though the work is not spelled out in the Scope Rule, it has
been assigned to employes whose positions are described in the Scope
Rule. It has been the practice and custom to assign Clerks at the
South Tacoma Shops to do the clock watching. Past practice, custom
and tradition at the South Tacoma Shops have made the clock-watching
work, work of the Clerks coming within the Clerks? Agreement. See
Award 5404.0
Third Division Award 7427, Referee H. Raymond Cluster, held:
.eityr* In this case, the Carrier ar,;ues, the assignment was not exclusive
because of the occasions on which, for the sake of convenience, the Agent
Telegrapher did this kind of work during Claimantps regular assignment.
However, we do not think that the use of the phrase vexclusively assignedq
in those cases has the restricted meaning which Carrier would give to
it; namely, that the clerk did every bit of the work. Rather, we think
the meaning intended was that the work was regularly, ordinarily and
customarily accomplished by the clerks as part of the regular duties
of their assignments - a state of facts which is admitted to be so in
this case. 4x"H~.O

Employee Member's Dissent to Award No. 5

The work covered by this dispute was assigned to Claimant by bulletin; Carrier conceded that Claimant performed the work durirZ his assigned hours and Awards 0101 and 7427 uphold our position that the work is covered by the Clerks? Agreement.

The decision of Chairman Frank P. Douglass is without logical basis.

/s/ T1. E. Straubin7er

tl. E. Straubinger, Employee Member

- 2 -