SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 355 Award No. 52
Case No. 12
O.R.T.No._2529
Parties: THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
THE BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY
AWARD IN DOCKET N0. 52
STATEMENT
OF CLAIM:
1. Carrier violated the Agreement when on dates of October 2, 12, 14,
15 and 18, 1956, it required- or permitted various employes located
at North Lima, Ohio, not covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement,
to contact the train dispatcher direct at Dayton, Ohio or Deshler,
Ohio to secure information on trains, transmit matters of record
and messages over the dispatcher's telephone.
2. Carrier shall compensate the idle operator for the dates of
October 2, 12, 14, 15 and 18, 1956, and all subsequent dates, for
all subsequent violations which are described in the Statement of
Facts on all three tricks at the points enumerated, eight hours'
pay.
FINDINGS:
Decision here must turn on an interpretation of Article 5, Section 3 of
the August 21, 1954 Agreement. It is as follows:
"3. Any claim may be filed at any time for an alleged continuing
violation of any agreement and all rights of the claimant or claimants involved thereby shall, under this rule, be fully protected
by the filing of one claim or grievance based thereon as long as
such violation, if found to be such, continues. However, no monetary
claim shall be allowed retroactively for more than 60 days prior to
the filing thereof. x x x"
It is the Carrier's position that the above section is restricted to
"continuing violations"; that the uses of the telephone referred to in the claim
here before us are "intermittent and irregular, although of frequent occurrence.
"The submission", Carrier argues further, "of the claim
covered by your file A-1805 (occurrences on December 28, 1956
and January 11, 15 and 17, 1957) as a new claim is further
evidence the Local Chairman did not consider those occurrences
as being included in the subsequent dates referred to in the
earlier case. x x 0
Award No. 52
Case No. 12
O.R.T.No. 2529
It is the Organization's position that Article 5,-Section 3 of the
August 21, 1954 Agreement
"plainly states that the claim may be filed at any time
and the rights of the claimants will be fully protected
by the filing of one claim or grievance based thereon.
The only provision is that the alleged violation must be
found to be a violation of the Agreement and must continue."
"Continuing" means that which continues, that which is continuous.
Webster covers the various forms of the basic word fully
"Continuous".is described as that which is "without break, cessation
or interruption; without intervening space or time; uninterrupted; unbroken;
continued."
It is clear the Carrier's position here is correct.
Having thus held, we must look to the occurrence of October 12, 1956:
"The Yardmaster used the Dispatcher's telephone to secure from
the Dispatcher information as to the time which the CTC control
board indicated that southbound trains had arrived at North Lima."
We agree with the Carrier that the above information does not fall
within any of the three restricted categories and thus the claim will be denied.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
/s/ B. N. Kinkead
B. N. Kinkead
Employee Member Dissenting
Dated at Baltimore, Maryland,
this 20th day of February, 1962.
/s/ Edward A. Lynch
Edward A. Lynch
Chairman
/s/ T. S. Woods
T. S. Woods
Carrier Member
4tiG 27 1982