SPECIAL HOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 1110
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees
and
CSX Transportation, Inc.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
1. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier assigned
local forces to perform track surfacing work between Mile
Posts 116.2 and 117.2 in the Shelby, Kentucky area, Ashland
Seniority District on Friday, May 26, 1995 [System File SPG
TC-9378/12 (95-734) CSX].
2. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier
assigned local forces to perform track surfacing work
between Mile Posts 116.2 and 117.2 in the Shelby,
Kentucky area, Ashland Seniority District on Friday,
May 26, 1995 [System File SPG-TC-9375/12 (95-737)].
Award No. 33
Case No. 33
The Agreement was violated when the Carrier
assigned local forces to perform track surfacing work
between Mile Posts 116.2 and 117.2 in the Shelby,
Kentucky area, Ashland Seniority District on Friday,
May 26, 1995 [System File SPG-TC-9377/12 (95-735)].
4. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier
assigned local forces to perform track surfacing work
between Mile Posts 116.2 and 117.2 in the Shelby,
Kentucky area, Ashland Seniority District on Friday,
May 26, 1995 [System File SPG-TC-9376/12 (95-736)].
5. As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part
(1) above, Machine Operator D.G. Ferguson shall be allowed
nine and one-half (9.5) hours' pay at the Class 'A' Machine
Operator's time and one-half rate.
6. As a consequence of the violations referred to in Part
(2) above, Assistant Foreman C.H. Gregory shall be allowed
nine and one-half (9.5) hours' pay at the assistant
foreman's time and one-half rate.
7. As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part
(3) above, Machine operator F.D. Guth shall be allowed nine
and one-half (9.5) hours' pay at the Class 'A' Machine
operator's time and one-half rate.
8. As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part
(4) above, Machine Operator R.J. Kinner shall be allowed
nine and one-half (9.5) hours' pay at the Class 'A' Machine
operator's time and one-half rate.
This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds
and holds as follows:
1. That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this
dispute are, respectively, Carrier and Employee within the
meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended,; and
2. That the Board has jurisdiction over this dispute.
OPINION of THE BOARD:
The record indicates that the parties entered a Letter Agreement
on September 28, 1993 that updated an arbitrated agreement
between the parties concerning the establishment of System
Production Gangs to perform production work--including track
surfacing work--across former property lines or seniority
districts.
The Agreement contains detailed provisions concerning the
establishment of rosters, bulletining and filling positions,
filling vacancies, filling vacancies pending bulletining and
assignment, the form of bulletin, the work week, overtime,
lodging, meal allowance, work site reporting, travel allowance
and travel advance, national agreements, rates of pay, special
rule concerning holidays, claims and grievances, emergency
conditions, vacation credits, seniority, work force
stabilization, an oversight committee, a non-discrimination
clause, labor protection, and the duration of the Agreement.
The preamble of the Agreement provides, in pertinent part, that:
For the purposes of this agreement,
production work that may be performed by a
SPG, is confined to the following work
activities: tie installation and surfacing,
surfacing, and rail installation. This
definition, however, does not limit the
Carrier's right to utilize non-SPG gangs to
perform these work activities nor does it
limit the Carrier's right to propose and
reach mutual agreement that other production
2
work be performed by SP's in
future.
A careful review of the Agreement reveals that an annual process
occurs to award the positions on the System Production Gangs. As
part of the bulletining and awarding of such positions, the
Carrier identifies the seniority districts over which the System
Production Gangs are programmed to work.
Section 5 of the Agreement, which the parties amended on
September 28, 1993, specifies:
The bulletins advertising SPG positions will
identify a proposed schedule of the work to
be performed by the particular SPG, and the
territory and seniority districts over which
the work is programmed.
The referenced provision in the preamble of the Agreement
explicitly reserves to the Carrier the right to have non-System
Production Gangs perform the type of work covered by the
Agreement. This is consistent with the fact that the local
forces involved have the right to perform any scope-covered work
on their seniority district. Under the circumstances involved in
this claim, when local forces were available to perform the work
at straight time on their regular work day, there was no
requirement that the Carrier use SPG forces at overtime on their
first rest day.
The Claim is denied.
D nald D. Bartholoma
Employee ember
Dated:
Robert L. Douglas
Chairman and Neutral Member
3
Patricia A: Madden
Carrier Member