PARTIES: THE ORDZR OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPRERS CAR. FILE: 1032
 TIM BALTIMORE AND OFIIO RAILROAD COMPAIIY OOM.FILE: A-1815
 GR. DIV. BU-6827-33

STATE"MT 1, Carrier violated the agreement between the parties
 OF CLAIM: when on March 7, 9, 10, ll, 12, 13, 14, 15, 7,957
 and on subsequent dates it requires or permits
 yardmastors, switchtenders or others outside the
 agreement to block trains both directions from
 Knoxville, Maryland and issue written permits in
 lieu of Form A for movements against the current
 of traffic.
 2. Carrier shall compensate an idle operator in the
 amount of a dayts pay (3 hours) on each date such
 violation occur.
 FINDINGS: In our Award No. 149 we said that "what we ha,vo
 is a situation where a yardmaster, in the perform
 ance of his duties, reaches a point where he is
 actually blocking trains, A sustaining award is
 required."
 The facts here are not in dispute. It is charged
 that in addition to their duty to operate hand
 thrown switches, the switchtenders "also use the
 telephone to establish a block between Knoxville
 and Weverton, or between Xnoxville and "t'JB" tower,
 and to report trains clear of the block; also to
 copy on a mimeographed forn a written permission
 from the yardmaster for clearance to proceed
 against the current of traffic."
 The throwing of ground switches is not involved in
 this claim. Carrier's reliance on our prior
 awards on that specific point is of no help to its
 position in this case. Neither does this involve
 a member of a train crew telephoning an operator;



                Claim susta d for dates specified; and on sub

                sequent os, only where su ted by tactual

                data.


                      (J , r , e ync ,


    ~ Chairman

    Pressly "I·5.IN."FT3tt

    Employee Membe`~' Carrier Member


Dated at Baltimore, Maryland this-16th day of Ren1:oMbAT_ 7_64_