Hearings April 9-30, 1958


                        Dallas, Texas


                        Award No. 20

PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

                  THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS


                    MISSOURI-KANSAS-'TEXAS LINES


STATEMENT OF CRT CLAIMS MC 1-22:

 1. "That relay telegraphers' work at Parsons, Denison and Waco has been transferred from employes in the Relay Seniority District to employes of the Northern, North Texas and South Texas seniority districts, and others, with subsequent abolishment of positions in the Relay district; and

 2. That the Carrier shall now be required by an appropriate order of the Board to pay these relay operators their original wages from the time their positions were so abolished until reinstated to their former positions; and

 3. ?that the telegraphic work improperly removed from said offices shall be ordered restored in accordance with their seniority right to such work.

 FINDINGS AND OPINION:

 The reduction in force mentioned in the statement of claims are alleged to have been effected by the Carrier in February, 1957, at relay stations in Parsons, Denison, and Waco, in support of its claims the ORT states that "relay district telegraphic work" has been transferred "to road telegraphers or to employes not covered by the Agreement." It further contends that these reductions have resulted, directly, and indirectly, in the abolishment of many positions under the Agreement, " ....all without regard to the Schedule Agreement, Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 15, 17, 26, 27 and Addendum No. 3.

    The above enumerated rules realte to the following subjects:


        Rule 1 Scope Rule

        Rule 2 Vacancies and Assignments

        Rule 3 Force Reduction

        Rule 4 Seniority

        Rule 6 New Positions

        Rule 7 Position Classification

        Rule 9 Hours of service

        Rule 15 Clerical work

        Rule 27 Relay service

        Rule 26 The 40-hour week-rest days-Sundays-Holidays

        Rule 27 Vacations


        Addendum No. 3


    In its concluding submission, the O%RT states:


        "Therefore, we respectfully request this Board to require the Carrier to pay these Operators who were cut off from the time their positions were abolished until restored to their positions, and resume their work in the Relay offices where it was formerly handled aver a period of many years before its transfer to other Districts."

Tfie Carrier opposes the claims on the ground that this Special Board has no authority to order it to re-establish the positions it abolished and recall the telegraphers, or to compensate the dismissed telegraphers for wages alleged to be owing them on account of wrongful abolishment of their positions. It cites and quotes from many Awards which support its position.

 - During the controversy about the reductions in force the parties conducted a joint
 check of-the work performance and efficiency at the three relay offices in question. There
 was -a .conflict in the reports based on the checks. After describing at length its findings
 following the joint check of the three relay offices, the Carrier concluded;

        "Cur view of the findings of the investigation is that present forces are ample to conduct the company business at each offices and there is no need for additional forces."


We have searched the rules cited by the CRT but we do not find any restrictions against reductions in force to effect economies.

    Rule 17 pertaining to Relay Service provides that,


        "(d). In relay service an employe displaced either by force reduction

        or by a senior employe in his home office may, if qualified, ....dis-

            place any .junior in his home office At the option of the employe,

            he may revert to the extra list ""


This rule recognizes that the Carrier may make reductions in force at relay offices and it does not place any restrictions on reductions.

    Addendum No. 3 contains thefollowing preamble;


        "The following list of current positions is prepared for no other purpose than to indicate the rate to be paid an employe when any of these positions are in effect."


Relay positions, as well as all other CRT positions on the Carriers' lines, are named and rated in the Addendum. But the preamble of the rule is emphatic in its recognition that the rule is "for no other purpose than to indicate the rate to be paid an employe when any of these positions are in effect." it infers that positions may be abolished and that therefore some of the enumerated positions may not be in effect at some future time.

 The Agreement does not support the request of the employes that the abolished positions be restored and that those who have been laid off be reemployed and compensated for lost time.

 Numerous awards state the correct rule, namely, that abolishing CRT positions under the Telegraphers' Agreement is within the sole discretion of the Carrier. It is obligated to operate an efficient railroad business in the public interest. It has not limited that obligation in its Telegraphers' Agreement. We have no authority to restrict the Carriers' legal right or to thwart its efforts to rearrange its work for greater efficiency.

 AWARD: Claim denied.
 L$,L 13AnigLr.. Rnge.r,p
 Daniel C. Rogers, Chairman
 Fayette, Missouri
 /s/ W. I. Christopher ~ A. F. Winkel
 W. I. Christopher, Employee Member Winkel, carrier fi,em er
 Deputy President, C. R. T. Asa`t General Manager
 3860 Lindell Blvd. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Lines
 St. Louis, 8, Missouri Dallas, Texas

 Dallas, Texas
 August 1* 1958