THE ORDER OF VRAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS )
 )
 VS. ) CLAIM N0. 54-22

 MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RAILROAD COMPANY )
 MISSOURI-KANSAS-TEXAS RAILROAD COHPANY OF TEXAS )

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 "l. Carrier violated Rule 1 of the Telegraphers' Agreement when it permitted the main man (caretaker) at Chouteau, Oklahoma to 'OS' Train No. 74, as passing that station at 3:20 p.m., January 25. 1958, with a hot box.

 "2, Carrier shall be required to pay Agent-Telegrapher Webb Fleming a day's pay at the minimum rate for Telegraphers plus his regular rate, according to Rule

 FINDINGS:

 The facts are undisputed. On Saturday. January 25, 1958, rest day for the Agent-Telegrapher, at 3;20 p.m., as train No. 74 was passing the station at Chouteau, Oklahoma, the Caretaker, who was on duty, observed a hot box on a car located about 5 cars behind the engine. He immediately signalled No. 74's train crew that they' had a hot box in the train, Not sure whether the train crew received his signal, the Caretaker went to the Dispatcher's telephone at the station and notified the Train Dispatcher of the hot box. At Smith, Oklahoma, a blind siding, 3.6 miles north of Chouteau, a member of the crew of train No. 74 advised the Dispatcher by telephone that a hot box signal had been received at Chouteau and that the hot box car would be set out at Smith. Thi's information that No. 74 would be delayed at Smith enabled the Dispatcher to put out a train order advantageous to movements of passenger trains Nos. 5 and 6.

 Under General Rule D it was the duty of the Caretaker to ".,..,report to the proper officer ...any condition or practice which may imperil the safety of trains, passengers or employees..." He reported a condition that imperiled the safety of Train No. 74. It was a condition that the Agent-Telegrapher would have been duty bound to report if he had been on duty at the time.

 The question for decision is whether Rule 1 (d) was violated when the Caretaker made the report on the telephone to the Dispatcher.


M-K-T Spl. Bd. 226 -2- Award No. 28

Choutesu was a "closed office" on the date in question. It was a rest day for the Agent-Telegrapher. Seeing that Train No. 74 was in great danger while running with a hot box, a station employee not covered by the ORT agreement forwarded a message by telephone to the Dispatcher. It was the kind of message or train report which has been communicated by telegraph or telephone by agents and telegraphers to train dispatchers since the earliest days of railroading. Moreover, it was the kind of message or train report which train dispatchers customarily enter of record at the time of receipt. It was also the kind of message or train report which is customarily entered of record at the forwarding office.

 In Rule 1 (d) the Carrier has agreed that if such a message or train report is communicated by "station or other employees" who may be on duty during the hours when an established Agent-Telegrapher office is "closed", it will pay the Agent-Telegrapher at that office the minimum rate per day for Telegraphers as set forth in the agreement. This is the price the Carrier has contracted to pay, in the form of a penalty, when any communication of the nature of this one is handled by others than an AgentTelegrapher during the hours when an Agent-Telegrapher office is "closed". Compensating for the rarely administered penalty provided for in Rule I (d) is the fact that the Carrier is able to effect savings in its operations by using caretakers when an Agent-Telegrapher station is "closed."

 AWARD;



                    Attorney at Law

                    211-212 Commercial Trust Building

                    Payette, Missouri


/s/ W. I. Christov~gr /s/ A,. F. Winkel
 W. I. Christopher, Employee Member A. F", Winkel, Carrier Member
 Deputy President, O.R.T. Vice President-Personnel
 3860 Lindell Blvd. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad
 St. Louis 8, Missouri Company
 Missouri-KansasmTexas Railroad
 Company of Texas
 Dallas 2, Texas
 Dallas, Texas
 June 6, 1960