- '-j._~__~eSS'PECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 266
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
vs.
THE DELAWARE, LACKAWANNA AND 14ESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
:
CLAIM N0. 1
The Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because
on Sunday, March 13, 1949 it required or permitted yardmaster
McGorarity, at Kingston, to transmit a message to Conductor Garvey
at Bloomsburg at a time both the Operator-clerk, C. E. Cotner, at
Bloomsburg, and operator-clerk, J. E. Gannon, at Kingston Yard,
were off duty; in consequence thereof Cotner shall be paid a 'call'
in the amount of $5.99 and a similar payment to Gannon in the amount
of $5.85.
CLAIM N0. 2
The carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because
on each September 26, 1950 and October 19, 1950, it required or
permitted a yardmaster.at Kingston to copy train consists from
distant points; in consequence thereof the senior idle employe,
extra in preference, shall be allowed a day's pay on each of these
dates and on any subsequent date the violation continues. The
records to be jointly checked to determine the payees.
CLAIM NO. 3
The Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because
on October 6, 1950, it required or permitted the conductor in charge
of train 1734 at Hanover Yard to transmit a message to a yardmaster
at Kingston Yard; in consequence thereof for this date and subsequent dates when similar messages are so handled two senior idle
employes, extra in preference, shall be allowed a day's pay for
work denied at each, Hanover Yard and Kingston Yard. The records
shall be jointly check to determine the payees.
CLAIM N0. 4
Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because on
October 31, 1950 it required or permitted Conductor Finnerty in
charge of Extra 2135 west to transmit a message from Wyoming Storage to a clerk at Kingston Yard; in consequence thereof two senior
idle employes, extra in preference, shall be allowed a day's pay
for work denied at each, Wyoming Storage and Kingston Yard. The
records to be jointly checked to determine the payees.
CLAIM N0. 5
Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because on
i
AWARD N0. 8
Statement of Claim --
Continued CASE
N0. 8
November 3, 1950 it required or permitted (1) a yardmaster at
Kingston Yard,
a location where an operator-clerk position had been
abolished, to copy train No. 1734's consist from the conductor of
that train from Hanover Yard and, also, copy Extra 358's consist
from Conductor Finan at Barlows, a location adjacent to the Plymouth
Station where an operator-clerk was employed; (2) conductor of train
1734 to transmit his consist to the yardmaster at Kingston Yard
from Hanover Yard; and (3) Conductor Finan on Extra 358 to transmit
his consist to the yardmaster at
Kingston Yard
from Barlow, a
location adjacent to Plymouth where an operator-was on duty; in
consequence thereof three senior idle employes, extra in preference,
shall be allowed a day's pay, one at each, Kingston Yard, Hanover
Yard and Barlow.
CLAIM N0. 6
The Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because on
November 24, 1950 it permitted or required the Conductor in charge of
train NS-38 at Berwick Yard to transmit to the yardmaster at Kingston
Yard a consist of his train; in consequence thereof a day's pay shall
bw allowed to the two senior idle employes, extra in preference, one
day at each Kingston Yard and Berwick Yard. A joint check of the
records to be made to determine the payees.
CLAIM N0. 7
The Carrier violated the rules of the Telegraphers' Agreement when
and because on December 5, 1950 it required or permitted the Conductor
in charge of train NS-38 at Berwick Yard to transmit to the yard-.
master at Kingston Yard a consist of his train; in consequence thereof
a day's pay shall be allowed to two senior idle employes, extra in
preference, one day at each Kingston Yard and Berwick Yard. A joint
check of the records to be made to determine the payees.
CLAIM N0. 8
The Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because on
February 6, 1951 it required or permitted the conductor in charge of
train NS-38 at Berwick Yard to transmit to a yardmaster, at Kingston
Yard a consist of his train; in consequence thereof a day's pay shall
be allowed to two senior idle employes, extra in preference, one day
at each
Kingston Yard
and Berwick Yard. A joint check of the records
to be made to determine the payees.
CLAIM N0. 9
The Carrier violated the provisions of the Telegraphers' Agreement
when and because on September 9, 1952 it permitted or required the
yardmaster at
Kingston Yard
to receive messages from the dispatcher
at Scranton; in consequence thereof idle extra employe Felarsky
shall be allowed a day's pay for work denied at Kingston Yard. _
-2-
AWARD NO. 8
Statement of Claim -- Continued CASE N0. 8
CLAIM NO. 10
Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because on
October 22, 1953 it required or permitted a yardmaster at Kingston
Yard to copy train 1734's consist from an operator-clerk at Bloomsburg at a time the operator-clerk at Kingston Yard was off duty; in
consequence thereof operator-clerk G. J. Capone at Kingston Yard
shall be allowed a 'call' payment in the amount of $6.25.
CLAIM N0. 11
The Carrier violated the Telegraphers' Agreement when and because
it required or permitted an employe outside of the Telegraphers'
Agreement at Kingston Yard to transmit a report designated as Form
T-93 (a mine report) to an operator-clerk at Scranton outside of
the operator-clerk's assigned hours at Kingston Yard, each work day
February 22, 1943, to November 8, 1946 on which date the transmissions were restored or assigned to the operator-clerk at Kingston
Yard; in consequence thereof the incumbent of the operator-clerk
position at Kingston Yard, on a day-to-day basis shall be allowed
a 'call' payment.
OPINION OF BOARD:
Claim 11 will be dismissed due to the organization's undue delay in progressing it to final adjudication. This claim was denied by Carrier's Chief
Operating Officer in April 1943. Subsequent discussions were held between the
parties at the Organization's request but no settlement was reached. The fact
of these subsequent discussions does not excuse the great lapse of time that
has occurred in this instance, however.
The remaining claims involve the transmission and/or receipt of consists
and other messages or reports by employees not covered by the subject Agreement. This has been a practice of long standing on the Carrier's property. The
Agreement does not define this work as exclusively reserved, to telegraph service employees.
A W A R D:
Claims 1 through 10 denied. Claim 11 dismissed.
/s/ Lloyd H. Bailer
Lloyd H. Bailer, Neutral Member
Dissenting /s/ F. Diegtel
W. I. Christopher, Employee Member F. Diegtel, Carrier Member
New York, New York
July 8, 1959
-3-