SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0.
553
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (PACIFIC LINES),
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the General Committee of The Order of Railroad
Telegraphers on the Southern Pacific (Pacific Lines), that:
CLAIM NO. 1
1. The Carrier violates the parties' Agreement at -
E1 Centro and Brawleyy California, when it permits
or requires employes not covered by the Telegraphers
Agreement to transmit or receive messages of record
in the form of bills of lading and/or shipping orders
over the telephone.
2. The Carrier shall, because of the violation set out
above:
(a) Assign such communication work to employes
covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement at
E1 Centro and Brawleyy California.
(b) Compensate J. M. Schwitzner, extra third shift
wire chief-telegrapher-clerk-PMO, E1 Centro,
for one special call on June 16, 17' 18' 21,
1959. .
(c) Compensate R. J. Mitchell, first wire chieftelegrapher-clerk-PMO B1 Centro for orie
special call on June,ig and 209
1959.
(d) Compensate Glenn Bacon, relief wire chieftelegrapher-clerk-PM09 El Centroy California,
for one special call on June 22,
1959.
3.
The Carrier shall, in addition to the foregoing; for
each date subsequent to those·set out in Items.lb)
through (d) aboveg on which employes not covered
by the parties' Agreement at El Centro, California,
sent or received messages of record over the telephone
in the manner herein described, compensate the senior,
idle, extra employe, if any, or the regularly assigned
employes listed in paragraphs (b) through (d) above,
and/or their successors, in accordance with the
overtime or call rules of the Agreerpent.
CLAIM N0. 2
The Carrier violates the parties' Agreement at Brawley,
California, when it permits or requires employes not
covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement to transmit or
receive messages of record in the form of bills of
lading and/or shipping orders over the telephone.
The Carrier sha119 because of the violation set out
above:
(a) Assign such communication work to employes
covered by the Telegraphers' Agreement at
Brawleyy California.
(b) Compensate R. G. Sherman, agent-telegrapher,
Brawley9 California, for one special call on
June 16y 17 189 199 209 22 (two hours at the
overtime rate) and one special call June 21'
1959
(three hours at the overtime rate.)
3.
The Carrier shall, in addition to the foregoing ' for
each date subsequent to those set out in Item (b)
above, on which employes not covered by the parties'
Agreement at Brawley9 California, send or receive
messages of record over the telephones compensate the
regularly assigned agent-telegrapher at Brawleyy, and/
or his successors in accordance with the overtime or
call rules of the Agreement."
OPINION OF THE BOARD:,
On the dates set forth 3n the two claims in this docket,
Clerks at Brawley, Californ~a telephoned information from original
shipping orders or bills of lading to Clerks at ET Centrog California.
The items of information are shown on pp
59-76
of the Record. They
included such things ass Consignees car numbers, character-of cargo
_ S8A .55 3
Aced
destination and route of the cars. The Organization contends that the
messages were communications of record, concerned the movement of
trains and under the Scope Rule belonged to the Telegraphers. It
charges that the transmission of these messages by Clerks constituted
violations of the Agreement.
The Carrier contends that this work does not belong
exclusively to Telegraphers and that it is clerical work which in the
past has been performed on this property by Clerks as well as Telegraphers. It also asserts that the communications did not affect the
movement of trains and that its transmission was merely for the purpose of speeding up the billing. We do not agree. The information
was telephoned while the cars were enroute between Brawley and
E1 Centro, and at the hearing Carrier admitted that it expedited the
handling of traffic from El Centro east. In our judgment the messages
affected the movement and operation. of trains and were communications
of record. They were the types of messages which have been historically and traditionally transmitted by Telegraphers since the days of
the Morse Code, and we think this work belongs to the Telegraphers.
Awards 8663 (Third Division) and 12610 (Third Division. -
Supplemental) on this property must be regarded as controlling here.
In 8663 the message telephoned by the Clerk at Herlong to a Dispatcher
gave information. as to loaded or empty-cars to be picked up., Carrier _
argued that the information did not include car identification numbers
or destination
of
cars and that no permanent record was made of the
communication. The Board said that they "are communications of
-3-
r
~i3~ 553
record and have to do in part with the operations of trains. For
example' some give car numbers with information as to the cargo
and the character and destination of the shipment." The claim was
sustained.
In.Award 12610 a Clerk at Bakersfield telephoned car information to the Telegrapher-Clerk at Delano. The messages gave car
numbers, the direction of such cars and when no bill of lading was
available.it was so indicated. The claim was sustained, the Board
saying "The messages were not purely informational. They are communications of record. They are concerned with the movement and operation
of trains. Award 8663 is controlling and is affirmed. . . : Telegraphers were employed in the Bakersfield station, The messages
should have been transmitted by them. In their absence, they should
have been called in accordance with the terms of the Agreement."
Another award with facts comparable to the present case is
9951. There a Clerk on duty on Sat, i?~aay at Wilson, North Carolina,
telephoned a Clerk at Greenville9 North Carolina, and gave him
information necessary for preparation of waybills for two cars of
tobacco which had left Wilson'~on memo waybills. This was held a
violation of the Telegraphers' Agreement. The Board said,'. ""The
messages here were the type that were necessarily sent by telegram
in the old days of Morse Code. These cars had been loaded in Wilson
some miles away, were made,into a train for Greenville before the
shippers were able to furnish information as to consignee, destination and route. Therefore, it was necessary to send this
_ _ · 56A 553
Au-)8
rl
information to Greenville before the train arrived there. Traditionally that could have been done in no other way than by telegraph
because of the distance and the time limit. Under Award 4516 this
is telegraph work. The messages satisfied the requirement mentioned
in Award 5182 (Boyd) in that there was 'direction given as to
where' and, 'by what route the cars*are to be moved'."
Awards cited by Carrier (12606, 12607, 12608, 12609, 12612,
12613, 12614, 12615, 12616, 12618, 12619, 12624) are not in point
because of the facts of each of these cases which were very different
from those of the case at hand. The messages in those claims ,covered
such things as: request to release certain cars?,
statement that cars were ready for release; block of serial numbers
to be used for bills of lading; reports that cars required repairs
and also that repairs had been made; statement that signal pole had
been knocked down and temporary repairs had been made; information
that CTC had been extended from one point to-another; number of yard
engines; yard engine days worked and number of cars handled; section
foreman's weekly report as to hours worked and how the hours were
spent. None of these Awards support Carrier's position here. These
Awards were all by the same. Referee (Dolnick) who is also the author
of Award 12610 relied-upon above. They were all adopted by the
Board on the same day as 12610 and the Referee specifically held in
each .instance that the messages did not relate to the movement of
trains nor. the safety of passengers or property. For the reasons
expressed above we hold that the work in question here did belong.
-5.
S B A 553
to the Telegraphers and that the claims are meritorious.
FINDING
That Carrier violated the Agreement.
AWARD
The claims are sustained.
'SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0.
553
Roy R. Ray, Chairman
D. A. Bobo, Employe Member
San Francisco R California
November 9, 1364
/' & 4~-
L. . Sloan, arrier Member