4UG
`~ '-V"
)~ SPECIAL BOARD.OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 305
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
THE DRDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
VS.
MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD CQMPANY
-(Southern & Western Districts)
AWARD, NO. 45
DOCKET NO,_ 45.
CASE N0. 2785
"Claim. of the General Committee of The Order of-Railroad-Telegraphers on
the Missouri Pacific Railroad, that:
1. Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties when on
February,24, 1958 it required or permitted an employe in the
Service Bureau, St. Louis, to transmit a communication of record
to.a yard clerk in the Yard Office at Hoisington, Kansas. .
2. Carrier shall compensate Mrs. M. D. Ringling, an extra unassigned
telegrapher, St. Louis, available (not working) eight hours at
the-pro rata rate for telegraphers in the.'GM' Office,. St. Louis
($2.43 per hour).
3. Carrier shall compensate Mrs. L. Y. Winans, regularly assigned
night chief operator, Hoisington, who was available (not working)
on her assigned rest day, eight hours at the pro rata rate of
$2.415per hour."
OPINION OF BOARD:
It is contended by the Organization that on February 24, 1958, an employe
in the Service Bureau, St. Louis, transmitted a communication by telephone to a
yard clerk at'Hoisington, Kansas. The message, as shown by the record here, contained the following:
"No. 62 date NKP.'24690 add via Winfield under file 56320."
This message was transmitted at 8:35-P.M. The .Organization takes the position that
such message constitutes a message of record and comes within ghe work as belonging
to telegraphers exclusively. Neither the-Service'Bureau employe in St. Louis nor
the yard clerk receiving the message.is covered under the Telegraphers'. Agreement.
As a result of such message being transmitted, the Organization made claim
on behalf of the namec employes who it is alleged should be compensated for one
day's pay at the pro rata rate.
The Carrier strongly urged upon the Board that the message quoted above,
which was telephoned by a clerk in the Service Bureau to a yard clerk at Hoisington,
is not a diversion order and neitheris it a message of record because no record
was made of it and there was no requirement that it be made of, record. The Carrier,
during the hearing, exhibited to the Board a message filed by the 'Service-Bureau
.AWARD NO. 45 = PAGE,Z -'
DOCKET,N0, 45
' k
,CASE 140. .2785
i
with.the.Relay,Office.at'St. Louis at 10:10 P.M., February,24x. 1958, which was
transmitted by- a ,telegrapher and received at Hoisington by,
a
'te1.egraplier.at ..
12:35 A.M.,:February.25,_1958,.which it contends was the-diversion-'order `involved
and did constitutes-message of record .at ..that time.
"The Board, after reviewing- the-record before us here, is of the,.opinion
that the message quoted above contains information to the effect to not .only hold
the car but to add the words "add via Winfield," which we hold gives additional
information as to routing-of the-car. In view of the Opinion and'Findings in Award
No. 14,. Special Board of Adjustment.No.,117, on this property, we conclude that
Carrier 'did violate the Agreement as contended.
As to allowance of compensation to the named claimants, such claims are
not supported by,the..record here. There'were_telegraphers on duty at-both St. Louis
and Hoisingtoh at the .time the telephone message ;was-transmitted. There is no
showing, the named claimants would be the proper claimants, nor is there.any..showing
that. any telegrapher suffered a .loss of compensation in any-respect.
FINDINGS: Carrier violated the Agreement.
AWARD
Claim sust.dined to the extent as.set forth in the
Opinion.
.SPECIAL BOARD"OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 305
/s/ Donald F. McMahon
Donald.F-. McMahon.- Chairman
/ s/ R. K., Anthis / s/ G., W. Johnson
R. K. Anthis -°prganization Member G.'W. Johnson -Carrier Member
St. Louis, Missouri
June _10,.1960
File 380-1853