AWARD N0. 11
DOCKET N0. 1;, GR.DIV. : 3865#',"'

 SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 591

 THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS,.

 VS.

 READING COMPANY

 STATEMENT ,

 OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee o£ The Order of Railroad
 Telegraphers on the Reading Company, than

 FINDINGS

 1, Carrier violated the parties Agreement when it required

 and/or permitted employee not included under our Scope Rule to perform communications o£ record work at "WS" Tower, Wayne Junction on February's, 6, 7,'8, and 9, 1962.·

This claim is based upon two alleged violations of the agreement, the issuing of TD-116 forms to train crews by a yardmaster instead of a telegrapher, and a .trainmaster reporting trains in and out of a block to ,the operator at the other end of the block.

. movement against the flow of traffic within yard limits and that they have been issued and delivered by yardmasters since 1945, before the first contract with this, organization. This being true, it is obvious that it is not work reserved to telegraphers by exclusive past performance and, that the
 `,:, parties have not tr?ated it as a train order in such long existing practice. Hence there is no violation of the agreement in this way.

 With respect to the block .reporting by a trainmaster,.:.. this was not denied on the property by the Carrier and the , meager showing of custom and practice thereon appears to ' support the claim that only, the operator in charge o£ one end o£ a block may perform such work at his location. Hence we'find that the claim should be sustained on this

 basis.
 ,, - 5-11 *097 Pt



    AWARD: Claim audtained. . ,, .~ f .

    ',. , . SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO: 591 ,. ;'


/s/ Dudle jj in
 .. , -, D CaD I E W"NG IN , CI-TAIR2 RAN '
      /s/ John T. Finnegan /s/ V. W. Bigelow

    JOHN T. FINNEGAN :Dissenting, ., , W. BIGELOW

    Organization Member Carrier Member - ; :.


    PHILADF'.LPHIA, PA. . . . ;. : . . .


      JAN 10 1966 ', e · . ', . ' . . . ..


              DISSENT TO AWARD N0. 11 :'f'

              Although this claim was sustained, it was necessary that .' . :' f

              dissent be registered for the reason,nert below listed.

                                              r 9 , ,


              I am in accord with the finding that it.was violative of the · r;.

              Agreement terms for a Trainmaster to block trains, a non-scope

              employe. However, the finding that a Form TD-116, used to

              authorize.train movements against the,current of 'traffic, is

              not a, train', order because it has not been "treated" 'as a train

                                                            ~'

              o-rder,-is palpably wrong. Carrier's own operating rules ,-show ;: r_

              that, .e TD-I16 'form is a train order. ~y -,. ~;°


                  ,' .,


                      °- ,'

                            k k"


                                        John T. FinneganLabor Member SBA,.591,. " ' .,

                                                . . , ,


                                .. 2» . . . `, .. ,. . _