SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 280
PARTIES) Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
TO ) and
)
DISPUTE) St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"It is the claim of the Brotherhood that:
"1. The Carrier violated the effective Agreement when
it required Extra Gang
No.
25; namely, Jerry Crossen,
foreman, Laborers Charlie Drown, H.D. Cooks, W.
Harris, G.A. Henderson, R.E. Johnson, Wayne Maxwell,
J.P. Rogers and Machine Operators D,R. Hancock and
Joe Heath, to change their regularly assigned hours
of 7:00 A24 to 4:00 PM to 9:00 AM until b;00 PM.
"2. The named Claimants, and/or their successors, members
of Extra Gang
No.
25, shall now be paid two hours,
7:00 AM to 9:00 AM, per day, each Claimant, at their
respective straight time rate; and two hours, 4:00 PM,
to G:00 PM, per day, each Claimant, at their respective
time and one-half time rate, beginning sixty (60) days
from the date of this letter and continuing until
Agreement complied with.
"3. These named Claimants, and/or their successors, be
likewise compensated for all such similar services
rendered, and for the exact amount of time on each
and every day, subsequent to tae dates specified,
and continuing until this violation of the Agreement
ceases."
FINDINGS:
The question to be determined in this particular dispute is
whether there was an agreement to change the starting times of
Extra Gang
No.
25 from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
Extra Gang
No.
25, a spot tamper or surfacing gang and Extra
Gang No. 21, a tie gang, were assigned to perform the tie renewal
and surfacing on the territory between Texarkana and Mt. Pleasant
during the summer of 1972. Extra Gangs
No. 21
and
No.
25 were
$b,A
z8~
-Aw
v
I
tZ
assigned to work in tandem with assigned work periods from 7:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m. In its submission Carrier states that it was necessary
to change the starting times of both gangs from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.
and that there was no objection by either gang.
In the handling on the property, the organization's Vice Chairman in effect conceded that there was agreement with respect to
Extra Gang No. 21, but denied that there was any discussion with
respect to Extra Gang No. 25.
The Board,is of the opinion that inasmuch as both gangs worked
together in tandem it is illogical to assume that Carrier would
not have discussed starting time changes with both gangs. It is
also illogical to assume that the Organization would object as to
Extra Gang No. 25 but agree as to Extra Gang No. 21.
Under the unique and particular circumstances of this dispute,
the claim must be denied.
AWARD ,
Claim denied.
Neutraq; Member
(J
Carrier Member O anization Member
Date: i /%J~
- 2 -