Award No. 51 I4/W No. 66-G EL No. 129 SPMIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTiENT N0. 541 PARTIES TO DISPUTE: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Erie Lackawanna Railway Company STATEi9ENT OF CLAIM:

1. The Carrier violated the effective Agreement by assigning to or allowing the work of operating the Division Inspection Car on the Buffalo and Rochester Division by a non-scope employee; namely, Trainmaster 1V1r. J. W. Connors, on Saturday, October 5, 1963 and subsequent dates thereafter.

2. Division Inspection Car Operator Mr. Harry Buchert be now reimbursed
for all hours involved in this violation of the Agreement, including
straight time, time and one half or double time, whichever it may
beg beginning October 5. 1963 and continuing until this condition
has been corrected.
FINDINGS:
Petitioner contends that Carrier is violating the Scope Rule of their
Agreement by having a trainmaster operate a hi-rail station wagon. According
to Petitioner, these vehicles have replaced the division inspection car that
formerly was assigned to each division office. Division inspection cars are
expressly covered by the provision of the Scope Rule, that reads as follows:

"Operators of tie tamper compressors of 210 cubic feet capacity or over, mole ballast machines, tie scoring machines, division inspection cars, mowing machines, weed discers, bolt tighteners, grinding and beveling machines, power jacks, weed burners and rail joint oiling machines and similar roadway machines." There are a number of significant distinctions between hi-rail station wagons and the division inspection cars as well as the other machines mentioned in the provision just quoted. The station wagons are considerably lighter, more mobile, do not activate signal circuits and readily operate on highways as well as on rail; they are used for a variety of purposes, including assignments that undisputedly do not violate the applicable Agreement. There is no indication that the station wagon has been used to transport maintenance of way employees or materials and the evidence is not sufficient to establish that it has been operated, to a substantial extent, for track inspection purposes, and as a replacement for the "division inspection cars" mentioned in the Scope Rule. In the light of these circumstances, the claim will be denied. AWARD: Claim denied. Adopted at Cleveland$ Ohio) October 16, 1974. /s/ H. M. Weston

H. M. Westony Chairman

/s/ R. A. Carroll /s/ A. J. Cunningham

R. A. Carroll, Carrier Member A. J. Cunningham, Employee Member

Award No. 51