PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

                .THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELE66RAPHERS


                  MISSOURI°1CANSA$-TEXAS LINES


ANT of CLAIM
Group l ORT Claim No. 9 is in behalf of Frank Hill, Tulsa, Oklahoma for eight j8) hours' pay at the minimum rate for telegraphers account Assistant Superintendent R. R. Bishop using telephone at Muskogee, Oklahoma, at 4135 p.m., May 30, 1957, in violation of Rule 1 (a) and 1 (d;) to call Dispatcher Burnett at Parsons to call Extras North out on Tulsa Branch and to call out Operator at Tulsa to take care of Extra 1505 South at Tulsa. At 4:42 p.m. Bishop called Clerk at Tulsa, located at the telegraph office, and the Clerk reported that Extra 1505 South departed Tulsa about 3;30 p.m.

 FINDINGS AND OPINION;

 Rule 1 (aj, the Scope Rule, does not guarantee any specifically described communications work to the ORT employe at a given station or position.

 With the advent of the telephone to the railroads the Carriers were able to adapt its easy use to perform new and improved services. Ir. could be used to perform the Carriers' communications services more flexibly and more economically. it would violate rules of construction to hold that all of the new and more flexible communications services belong to the ORT employes, exclusively. Thoughtful consideration of the far reaching effects of such a holding proves its error. It would put the carriers in a communications straight jacket.

 The communications work performed by Assistant Superintendent Bishop at Muskogee, as described in the claim and in ORx exhibit No. 71, is Scope Rule work, undoubtedly, but is not the kind of Scope Rule work which belongs to ORT employes, exclusively.

 First, it appears that Mr. Bishop had a "back and forth" discussion with the train dispatcher at Parsons about an extra that was about ready to move north out of Muskogee on the Tulsa branch. This conversation included the planning for calling the Extra. It could best be effected by the officer and the dispatcher speaking directly to each other.