., · r











































`.
                                              Case No. 6


A11 of the outside yard work (yard check, taking seal records, listing cars and general yard work) was assi;ned to the two clerical positions. Each of the telegrapher positions performed clerical work to fill out their time. The Agent-Telegrapher performed no outside yard work except weigh or handle livestock during his shift; and he performed no regular telegraphic duties except to assist.

 The Carrierfs records, which only go back to March 1 1925, show the station forces on that date as follows:

                      Agent-Telegrapher

                      Telegrapher-Clerk

                      Telegrapher-Clerk

                      Telegrapher-Clerk

                      Clerk

                      Clerk

                      Clerk


From that time the telegraphic positions have remained constant but the clerical positions have been abolished and re-established as follows:

 Clerk Position No. 1640 Abolished Re-established
 August 29 1940 November 16 1940
 June 20 1945 November 8 1948
 February 4 1954
 Clerk Position No. 1645
 February 17 1926 July 25 1926
 December 25 1931 July 5 1932
 December 1 1934 September 30 1935
 March 1 1938 March 5 1942
 August 4 1954 -

 lhhen Clerk Position No. 1640 was abolished on February 5 1954, the duties of the position were distributed among the remaining positions as follows: to the Agent Telegrapher (5017); to the first trick Telegrapher Clerk (19000); to the second trick Telegrapher-Clerk (19004); to the third trick Telegrapher-Clerk (25-')9 and to the Clerk Position No. 1645 (40·'). The Organizationgs check shows more hours. The Carrier?s check shows the performance of 421&7 of telegraphic work during the first trick.

 First. While this dispute was pending before the Third Division the Carrier Members moved that i?proper notice under Section 3 First (j) of the Railway Labor Act, amended, (be given) to other parties involved in the proceedingsiP; but the motion failed to carry and it does not appear that any such notice has ever been given.

 For the reasons stated in S.B.A. Uo. 174 Award 1 -IFirsO, ;,is pass to consideration of the merits.

                            _ 2 -

          r

v ~ i


                                              Award No. 6

                                              Case No. 6


    Second. When Clerk Position No. 1640 was abolished, there remained one clerical

    position and four telegrapher positions, two of which were assigned to the first

    trick.


There was only about four hours of telegraphic work during the first tricky and there is no showing that the services of two telegraphers were required during that trick. It also appears that the assignments of the Cleric Position No. 1645 and the first trick Telegrapher-Clerk position overlapped for 2?15,1 from 7:45 AM to 10 AM.

 For the reasons stated in S.B.A. No. 174 Award 5 the claim should be sustained to the extent hereinafter indicated.

 Third. The claimant here is Pettett and he is also the claimant in S.B.A. No. 174
 Award 7. This comes about by reason of the fact that when Clerk Position No. 1640
 was abolished on February 4 1954, Pettett exercised displacement privileges on
 Clerk position No. 1645 which set in motion a series of displacements that are the
 subject of Items (d) and (e) of the claim. When Clerk Position No. 1645 was abol
 ished on August 4 1954, Pettett filed the claim which is the subject of S.B.A. No.
 174 Award 7.

 Item (c) of the claim is for three calls per day but the evidence supports no more than a single continuing violation of the Agreement during the first trick only.

 Items (c) and (d) of the claim are for monetary loss suffered by all clerks who were displaced. This Agreement does not provide liquidated penalties for violation of the Agreements but Third Division Adjustment Board awards have nonetheless provided penalties because Uexperience has shown that if rules are to be effective there must be adequate penalties for violation'? (Award 685). It follows that the Carrier is not relieved of all obligation to pay any penalty because Claimant Pettett immediately displaced on Clerk Position No. 1645 and suffered no monetary loss. By the same token, it follows that the Carrier did not incur penalties in favor of everyone who may have been consequently affected by the abolishment of Clerk Position No. 1640. tie hold that the payment of Pettettps claims oaill satisfy all of the Carrier's obligations arising by reason of this violation of the Agreement (Award 56529 compare Awards 4393 and 1605).

                          A L'1 A R D


Item (a) of the claim sustained. Item (b) of the claim denied. Item (c) of the claim sustained for the period February 5 1954 to August 4 1954, to the extent of one minimum call each day. Item (d(1 of the claim denied. Item (e) of the claim denied.

                        /s/ Hubert gYckoff

                          Chairman


Is,/ A. D. Stafford Is/ J. D. Bearden
 Carrier Member Employe Member

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois December 16 1958
                            -3-