|
|||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||
|
More Than One Class of Service
Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 183
Neutral: Joseph Lazar
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern (FtW&D)
Award Date: 1986-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for fifty-five (55) minutes (11 miles) in addition to all other earnings when required to perform more than one class of road service during their tour of duty. Claimants were regularly assigned in local freight service and on date of claim were required to unload ballast with time consumed 55 minutes. The Board holds that since Claimants were in assigned local freight service, they were properly compensated at the highest rate for all service performed in accordance with Section A-1 of the December 3, 1952 National Agreement.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2049-Award 184
Neutral: Joseph Lazar
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern (FtW&D)
Award Date: 1986-10-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for an additional 2 hours, 30 minutes when required to perform more than one class of road service. Claimants were assigned in road switcher service, and holding in accordance with Award 183, the Board finds that they were properly compensated under Section A-1 of the December 3, 1952 National Agreement.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 3584-Award 16
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU vs. Conrail
Award Date: 1986-06-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for three days' pay when required to assist another train at an intermediate point and then recouple to their own train to complete their road trip. The Board finds no support for Organization's claim that the rules prohibit a crew operating in interdivisional through freight service from being required to render helper service and holds that Claimants were properly paid.
View Award
Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2852
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago and North Western
Award Date: 1984-09-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for one (1) day's pay at prevailing way freight rate when required to rerail an engine of a foreign railroad on an industry track. The Board finds that Claimants were paid at the highest rate applicable for performing more than one class of road service and since it was necessary to rerail the engine in order to serve the industry, this claim will be denied.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2909-Award 72
Neutral: Gene T. Ritter
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern (C&S)
Award Date: 1984-05-16 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and Brakemen for 100 miles at yard rates and 35 minutes for helper service. The Board finds that Claimants were required to switch 16 cars from the main track to a side track prior to departing their initial terminal. Since yard crews were on duty at the time the work was performed, they are entitled to the yard day. The Board finds further that Claimants were inducted into helper service later in their trip and they are entitled to the compensation claimed.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 3290-Award 7
Neutral: Robert E. Peterson
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore and Ohio
Award Date: 1983-12-05 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for eight (8) hours pro rata and 49 hours 30 minutes at the punitive rate, less payment allowed. Organization contends that Claimants are entitled to payment on a continuous time basis when improperly worked out of their away-from-home terminal. Carrier contends that Claimants were properly compensated for all service performed on the dates in question in accordance with the More Than One Class of Road Service and Combination of Service Rules. The Board holds in accordance with the Carrier's contention.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 3153-Award 2
Neutral: William E. Fredenberger, Jr.
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1983-07-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer and Fireman for one day's pay at the appropriate freight rate when required to work in two (2) classes of road service. The Board has reviewed all the facts and awards cited by the parties and holds that Claimants were properly compensated under the "More Than One Class of Road Service" rule in effect on the property.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 3220-Award 1
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: UTU vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1983-07-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for additional compensation on various dates when required to perform two (2) classes of service. Upon review of the facts of record, the Board finds that Claimant was properly compensated for service performed and there is no support for the instant claims.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2487-Award 64
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU-E vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe (EL)
Award Date: 1983-04-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for 100 miles on two (2) dates when required to perform "dog catching" service, and 100 miles at yard rate on one day account yard service performed. Claimant was on a regularly assigned road switcher assignment and was instructed to pick up a train which had died under the Hours of Service Law. Organization contends that the work performed was outside the scope of Claimant's assignment. Carrier contends that Claimants were properly compensated under the More Than One Class of Road Service Rule for all service rendered. The Board concurs with the contention of the Carrier and holds that the dog catch service performed during the tour was not additional service performed outside the assignment.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2487-Award 45
Neutral: Irving T. Bergman
Parties: UTU-E vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe - E&W Lines
Award Date: 1982-11-30 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Engineer for 100 miles when required to handle a train not in connection with his own assignment. Claimant was brought on duty and transported a distance of three (3) miles where he took charge of a train tied up under the Hours of Service Law and handled it back to his home terminal. He thereafter took charge of his own train and operated his assignment. Organization contends that Claimant was required to operate into and out of his home terminal in violation of the rules and, further, Claimant was required to perform both road service and yard service. Carrier relies entirely on the More Than One Class of Service Rule and contends that Claimant was properly compensated for the service rendered. The Board concurs with the contention of the Carrier.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1312-Award 532
Neutral: Arthur T. Van Wart
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Baltimore & Ohio RR Co.
Award Date: 1982-08-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains the claim of a passenger crew for the freight rate of pay when a live Sperry Rail Testing Car was attached to their train at an intermediate point and used in testing rail for the balance of Claimants' trip. The Board finds that the mere hauling of a Sperry car would not per se place Claimants in another class of service, but there was a valid basis for a claim where, as here, it was live and in active service and was involved in the testing of rails.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1872-Award 7
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakemen for one (1) day at yard rates when instructed to cut away from their road train and assist another road train from a point within yard switching limits to a point in road territory, thereafter returning to their outbound road train. Carrier paid Claimants for all mileage actually operated at the highest through freight rate applicable. Organization cites prior award and similar claims paid by the Carrier in support of its position. The Board, however, finds that where a road crew performs pusher service in both yard and road territory and is paid at the highest through freight rate, there is no justification for the additional day for terminal switching.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1872-Award 13
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Rwy. Co.
Award Date: 1982-03-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and Brakeman for one (1) yard day for performing yard service when they assisted a stalled train from a point within switching limits to a point in road territory. The Board denies this claim in accordance with the rationale used in Award No. 7 of this Board.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1483-Award 61
Neutral: Robert M. O'Brien
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central-Portland Term.
Award Date: 1982-01-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and crew for one (1) day's pay for being required to perform two (2) classes of yard service during one tour of duty. Organization contends that Claimants were called for "puller service", which involves moving cars from one track to another in order for the track to be cleared of snow, and then placing them back on the original track. In addition, they were required to perform general yard switching. The Board finds that Claimants performed no special service as contemplated by the alleged rule violation, which would require the claim to be sustained. Claimants performed only general yard service during their entire tour of duty.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1483-Award 62
Neutral: Robert M. O'Brien
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central-Portland Term.
Award Date: 1982-01-22 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and crew for one (1) day's pay for being required to perform two classes of yard service during one tour of duty. The Board finds this case to be identical to that involved in Award No. 61 of this Board and denies this claim on the same basis.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2492-Award 26
Neutral: Neil P. Speirs
Parties: UTU vs. Detroit & Toledo Shore Line
Award Date: 1981-11-04 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and Brakemen for 100 miles at local switcher rate for which called, one (1) hour at road switcher rate for through freight switching, and three (3) hours and fifty-five (55) minutes at road switcher rate for straight-away through freight movement, less amount already paid Claimants for this trip. The Board finds that Claimants were called to perform service as road switchers and thereafter were required to perform through freight service and are therefore entitled to the above payment in accordance with the rules in effect on this property.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2583-Award 13
Neutral: Neil P. Speirs
Parties: UTU vs. Detroit & Toledo Shore Line
Award Date: 1981-08-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains in part, the claim of Switchman for eight (8) hours when required to assist his Foreman in his duties, but denies claim to establish a promotion date because of such assistance. The Board finds that, in effect, Claimant was ordered to assist his Foreman in programming the computer in the hump tower to insure that the cars would be put in the proper track. However, in so doing, Claimant did not satisfy the requirements of the Carrier insofar as establishing a seniority date as a Foreman/Car Retarder Operator.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2703-Award 30 (1e)
Neutral: Robert J. Ables
Parties: UTU vs. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Award Date: 1981-04-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of Conductor and Brakemen for 100 miles' lap-back. Claimants were required to lap back in order to rerail engines that had been derailed by another crew. Carrier contends that the More Than One Class of Service Rule is applicable. The Board rejects this contention on the basis that the lap-back rule contains its own exception provisions, and Carrier may not attempt to fabricate an exception by application of another rule.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1900-Award 44
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific RR Co.
Award Date: 1981-04-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains the claim of a pool freight crew for an additional 100 miles when required to cut off from their train and assist a disabled train in excess of two (2) miles. In sustaining the claim, the Board finds the claim is supported by Letter of Understanding between the Chief Personnel Officer and the respective General Chairman, which established the proper payment when required to assist a disabled train under the circumstances involved herein.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2492-Award 14
Neutral: Neil P. Speirs
Parties: UTU-T&C vs. Detroit & Toledo Shore Line
Award Date: 1981-03-24 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claims of Conductor and Brakemen for additional compensation of 100 miles under the MOCS Rule and an additional 200 miles' deadhead. Claimants were deadheaded to an outlying point and handled train tied up under the Hours of Service Law, into its final terminal. They were then required to deadhead again to an outlying point to handle another train tied up under the Hours of Service Law, into the final terminal. Essentially, this claim is for payment of deadhead allowance in lieu of continuous time allowed by the Carrier. The Board finds that the claim under the MOCS Rule is invalid because Claimants were properly compensated for each trip out of the terminal as a separate tour of duty. With regard to the claims for deadhead allowance, the Board holds in accordance with prior awards on this property, that the Carrier may place the employee on duty at the home terminal and transport him under pay and need not apply the deadhead rule.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2379-Award 13
Neutral: David H. Brown
Parties: UTU-S vs. Denver and Rio Grande Western
Award Date: 1980-08-20 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains the claim of a yard crew for an additional day's pay when required to leave their regular yard assignment and move a Sperry Rail Car, operated by its own crew, with Claimants handling switches for the move. The Board, in sustaining the claim for the entire crew, finds on principle, the use of the entire crew instead of a single crew member is indistinguishable and in handling the disputed work, Claimants may be viewed as three pilots or three herders, but in either case they were used off their assignment.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2418-Award 8
Neutral: Joseph A. Sickles
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk and Western
Award Date: 1980-04-29 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains the claim of an engine crew for an additional payment of an additional day when required to perform more than one class of service. Claimants commenced their tour of duty in work train service and then were put in through freight service at an intermediate point. Based on a prior award, the Board finds that when Claimants switched from one class of service to the other, they came under the rules applicable to the various services and the claim was sustained.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 2193-Award 12
Neutral: A. Thomas Van Wart
Parties: BLE vs. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Award Date: 1980-03-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains the claim of engineer in local service for an additional day at the yard rate of pay when required to assist a disabled road train within terminal limits into the yard. Carrier denied the claim on the basis that the More Than One Class Of Road Service rule was applicable and was not excluded as to road service performed within the switching limits of a terminal. The Board finds the contention advanced by the employees, that it was service outside of claimant's assignment, to be proper and sustained the claim on that basis.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1900-Award 97
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Missouri Pacific
Award Date: 1980-01-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of Conductor and crew for 100 miles when required to stop their road train, cut off their engines, and assist a disabled train thereafter returning to their own train and completing their road trip. Organization contends that this claim is supported by Letter of Understanding between the parties and Claimants are entitled to 100 miles for the service performed. However, the Board cites several Disputes Committee decisions involving both the Guthrie and Cheney Awards and holds that Claimant Conductor is entitled to the highest rate of pay applicable to the services performed plus 25 minutes extra compensation for assisting the disabled train under the Guthrie Award and Claimant Brakemen are entitled to the highest rate applicable to the classes of service performed for the entire trip under the Cheney Award.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 104-Award 5
Neutral: Byron R. Abernethy
Parties: UTU-T vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa FE-WL
Award Date: 1979-08-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Sustains claim of a Yard Helper for an additional day's pay at the engine foreman rate when separated from his regular crew by the yardmaster and transported to another point to throw a switch to permit an extra passenger train to enter into the yard. The Neutral held that Herder or Pilot work was Engine Foreman work and Claimant had therefore performed two classes of service and was entitled to the additional day at the Foreman rate.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1401-Award 4
Neutral: Robert M. O'Brien
Parties: UTU vs. Burlington Northern Inc.
Award Date: 1979-06-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Baggageman sustained for actual mileage at through freight rate from point where car of flowers was picked up to the final terminal. Claimant denied 329 miles at through freight rate; the entire mileage from initial to final terminal. Neutral finds that a combination of road service was performed, namely passenger and through freight. Therefore, Paragraph 1-A-1 of the Award of Arbitration Board No. 169 applies allowing actual mileage at the highest rate of service performed.
View Award
Special Board of Adjustment No. 100-Award 380
Neutral: Jacob Seidenberg
Parties: UTU vs. St. Louis Southwestern
Award Date: 1979-05-14 00:00:00
Synopsis: Denies claim of a through freight crew for 45 minutes' station switching when required to unload a car of company gravel at an intermediate point. Claimants, in through freight service, were paid for the entire trip at the work train rates for performing this service. The Neutral held that unloading a car of gravel is not switching a car in the traditional use or application of the concept of station switching and sustained the Carrier's position that payment at the highest rate applicable to any class of service performed was the proper payment under contractual provisions.
View Award
Arbitration Board 168-Award BLF&E-63-W
Neutral:
Parties: UTU-E vs. Soo Line
Award Date: 1979-02-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claim of engineer for 100 miles when not called to perform main line hostling is dismissed. Committee has no jurisdiction over time limit on claims issue involved or the merits of claim for hostling service.
View Award
Arbitration Board 168-Award BLF&E-64-W
Neutral:
Parties: UTU-E vs. Soo Line
Award Date: 1979-02-09 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claim of engineer for 100 miles, contending performance of main line hostling service when engaged in road-helper service, remanded to the parties for determination on the property. Committee is unable to determine whether another class of road service or hostling was performed in accord with applicable rules and practices.
View Award
Special Board of Adjustment No. 235-Award 2179
Neutral: H. Raymond Cluster
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago & North Western
Award Date: 1977-09-21 00:00:00
Synopsis: Through freight conductor and brakeman denied an additional basic day when required to help a Milwaukee Road train using C&NW trackage which stalled within the confines of an interlocking plant. Neutral finds that claimants performed a combination of through freight and helper service under the applicable more than one class of road service rule and were properly paid by carrier under the MOCS rule.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1815-Award 3
Neutral: William M. Edgett
Parties: UTU vs. Penn-Central
Award Date: 1977-09-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Train crew denied additional compensation for time spent in work train service under contention of more than one class of service. Claimants were called for work train service but departed the initial terminal with four (4) empty box cars which they set out at an intermediate point prior to commencing work train service. Employees contend that despite being called for work train service, they departed the terminal in through freight service. Neutral finds that claimants did perform a "combination of service" for which they were properly compensated. He did not identify the two (2) types of service performed or how they were compensated.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1815-Award 9
Neutral: William M. Edgett
Parties: UTU vs. Penn-Central
Award Date: 1977-09-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Road freight train crew sustained in claims for an additional day at the yard rate. Claimants, while in road service, were required to assist another train all within terminal switching limits, thus performing yard service.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1302-Award 128
Neutral: William M. Edgett
Parties: UTU-E vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1977-09-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: A work train which was required to perform station switching to finish their tour of duty reverted to through freight under the More Than One Class of Service Rule. Carrier then violated the applicable schedule rule by tying up engineer-claimant and crew in less than 14 hours. Engineer claim for continuous time amounting to 12 hours, 5 minutes sustained.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1305-Award 120
Neutral: Leverett Edwards
Parties: UTU-E vs. Baltimore & Ohio
Award Date: 1977-06-01 00:00:00
Synopsis: Engine crew in work train service denied an additional 100 miles resulting from work performed in "pulling" a portion of a foreign line train operating on B&O trackage due to derailment, then shoving the cut of cars to a coupling in forward movement through a siding. Neutral finds that claimants did not perform a combination of service in accord with the Award of Arbitration Board No. 168 which would have allowed extra compensation per Paragraph I-A-2 of said award.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 717-Award 327
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-T vs. St. Louis-San Francisco
Award Date: 1976-02-13 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claims of various conductors on various dates for additional "mine run allowances" sustained only to the extent that actual time with equivalent mileage be allowed in traversing the trackage linking the main line with the coal tipple and a "series of tracks serving that institution exclusively."
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1036-Award 186
Neutral: John F. Sembower
Parties: UTU vs. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe
Award Date: 1975-09-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Conductor and crew performing service on an extra train, apparently in freight service, sustained in claim for an additional 100 miles' lapback. Claimants in progressive movement of their train were required to stop behind preceding train containing a car with failed journal. Claimants were required to uncouple their locomotive and move to coupling with caboose of train ahead; then in reverse movement of .8 miles with rear portion of said train set out the "bad order" within station limits. Forward movement was then made with the caboose and remaining cars to coupling with the train assisted. Neutral sustains on fact of reverse movement to a point within station limits. It is further ruled that a lapback is not susceptible to any specific mileage or quotient thereof. Carrier contention that proper payment comes solely within application of more than one class of road service rule considered inapplicable.
View Award
First Division, N.R.A.B. -Award 22797
Neutral: Nicholas H. Zumas
Parties: UTU-T vs. Southern
Award Date: 1975-01-07 00:00:00
Synopsis: Train crew of assigned local freight sustained in the amount of an additional 100 miles as claimed when required to push passenger train and thus provide helper service outside the assigned limits of their bulletined territory. Board sustains on finding that carrier's proffer of payment at the higher helper rate for the entire time on duty under more than one class of road service schedule rule inapplicable under circumstances.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1324-Award 3
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Chesapeake & Ohio
Award Date: 1974-09-23 00:00:00
Synopsis: Claims of conductor and brakemen sustained for an additional yard day each when required to assist another train by shoving same within yard switching limits. Carrier contention that more than one class of service rule applies rejected by the neutral with reasoning that while it applies on the road it does not apply within yard switching limits.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 1266-Award 13
Neutral: C. Robert Roadley
Parties: UTU vs. Chicago, New Orleans & Texas Pacific
Award Date: 1974-07-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Various claims of engineers and firemen (helpers) sustained for 50 miles' lapback in each case when required to assist other trains preceding them during progression of claimant's road trips. Facts indicate that lapbacks occurred when the crew members of the following trains were required to make a reverse movement with the rear portion of the preceding trains due to various reasons requiring assistance. Claims sustained due to past settlements involving interpretation of the specific lapback rule having application on this property.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 974-Award 73 & 74
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1974-02-27 00:00:00
Synopsis: Engineer in assigned local freight service sustained in claim for an additional 100 miles plus 12 miles' actual deadhead when required to make an "unscheduled" side trip. Claimant in the progressive movement of his train was at an intermediate point when the locomotive of a passenger train failed 12 miles from said point. He was required to detach a locomotive from his diesel consist and operate it light to the point where passenger train was stalled then deadhead on the passenger train back to the point where his train was located in order that he continue his trip. Due to previous precedent settlement on the property identical to instant case, board determines that more than one class of road service rule has no applicability under the circumstances involved.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 948-Award 23
Neutral: John B. Criswell
Parties: UTU-E vs. Seaboard Coast Line
Award Date: 1973-06-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Regularly assigned yard engineer sustained in claim for an additional one hour, thirty minutes when required to perform "incidental" work train service during his regular tour of duty. Claim constitutes an arbitrary provided for in schedule agreement requiring payment for the other class of service in actual minutes with minimum payment of one (1) hour.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 990-Award 11
Neutral: Arnold M. Zack
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central-Portland Terminal
Award Date: 1973-04-18 00:00:00
Synopsis: Conductor and trainmen in regularly assigned local freight service denied claim of 100 miles for conductor and 37-1/2 miles each for the respective trainmen when, as part of their regular assignment, they were required to operate snow plow from their initial terminal to an intermediate point 22 miles on their bulletined line of road. They performed local switching on the remainder of their trip until reaching final terminal. Neutral denies on basis of reasoning under similar circumstances of Award No. 15, Special Board of Adjustment No. 560, that while claimants were engaged in snow plow service they were relieved of responsibility for handling any freight cars or switching. Neutral decrees that claimants performed a combination of work train and local freight service, payable at the highest rate of any service performed during the trip under the more than one class of service rule. Since the local freight rate constituted the highest rate for any service performed claimants received no additional payment.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 486-Award 103
Neutral: Preston J. Moore
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Maine Central - Portland Terminal
Award Date: 1973-04-02 00:00:00
Synopsis: Trainmen who were called for and performed wreck train service in addition to local freight service on a continuous time and trip basis, allowed the highest rate of any service performed for the entire trip under the applicable more than one class of road service rule. Original claim for separate payments of 100 miles each for wreck and local freight service set aside by the board.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 817-Award 30
Neutral: Howard A. Johnson
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Soo Line
Award Date: 1973-03-12 00:00:00
Synopsis: Assigned road brakemen sustained in claims for an additional 100 miles each, when required to clear the way for forward movement of their train. They set over the caboose and 4 cars of a local freight operating in the opposite direction which had stalled on the main line at an intermediate point due to engine failure. Claim sustained under provisions of a schedule rule mandating payment when required to provide helper service in connection with a train operating in the opposite direction.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 745-Award 5
Neutral: Mortimer Stone
Parties: UTU-T vs. Colorado & Southern
Award Date: 1971-10-28 00:00:00
Synopsis: Conductor and brakemen in through freight service sustained in claim for the highest rate applicable to any class of service performed for the entire trip; reduced from claim for an additional 100 miles at local freight rate. Before leaving initial terminal they were instructed to stop at an intermediate point to assist another crew in pulling a bulldozer out of the mud and were thereby delayed for 25 minutes. Board determines that more than one class of service rule applies, but does not stipulate the other class of service performed.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 494-Award 7
Neutral: Arthur W. Sempliner
Parties: UTU-C&T vs. Detroit and Toledo Shore Line
Award Date: 1971-03-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Conductor and brakemen in through freight service and who performed a combination of through freight and local freight service during their trip allowed an additional 5 minutes' equivalent mileage instead of the 1 hour, 5 minutes as claimed. More than one class of service schedule rule applies and is not in dispute here; the actual time spent in performing the local freight service is in dispute. Board determines that the actual time spent in clearing other trains is not to be computed as time spent in performing another class of service since such delays would have occurred irrespective of whether the additional local freight service had been performed.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 556-Award 5
Neutral: John H. Dorsey
Parties: UTU-T vs. Chesapeake & Ohio
Award Date: 1971-02-26 00:00:00
Synopsis: Conductor and brakemen in local freight service sustained in the amount of an additional day each less overtime accrued in excess of 10 hours. Additional day properly compensable at the work train rate of pay when claimants were required to detach the locomotive from their train and run over a newly constructed section of track in order to "pack it down".
View Award
Arbitration Board 168-Award BLE-48-W
Neutral:
Parties: BLE vs. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe
Award Date: 1970-04-15 00:00:00
Synopsis: Engineer sustained in the amount of 11 additional miles as claimed when required to perform a combination of through freight service and helper service per Paragraph I-A-2 of the "Guthrie" Award. Engineer in pool freight service required to couple entire locomotive and train into rear of preceding train to assist it on hill. Therefore, paid additional mileage on the pro-rata minute basis for all time spent in helper service plus all compensation for regular through freight trip.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 299-Award 1
Neutral: Robert O. Boyd
Parties: UTU-E vs. Western Maryland
Award Date: 1969-10-10 00:00:00
Synopsis: Engineer and fireman (helper) sustained in claims for a basic day in wreck train service plus a basic day and overtime incurred when required to perform service as a road switcher. Claimants initially called for wreck service and departed on their trip with a crane when its boom was damaged by an overhead bridge. Claimants were then required to set out the crane on yard tracks and make a second departure as a road switcher. Carrier's proffer of payment under the more than one class of road service rule at the highest rate of any service performed for the entire trip found inapplicable. Board determines that claimants were required to perform two separate service trips.
View Award
Public Law Board No. 111-Award 5
Neutral: Robert O. Boyd
Parties: BRT vs. Norfolk & Western
Award Date: 1968-04-25 00:00:00
Synopsis: Trainman in turnaround passenger service sustained in claim for 210 miles at freight rate, the highest rate of any service performed, when required to handle freight cars enroute on a single "leg" of the trip. Board determines that claimant performed a combination of freight and passenger service properly payable under the more than one class of road service rule for the entire turnaround trip mileage. Carrier's proffer of payment amounting to 105 miles at passenger rate and 105 miles at freight rate ruled inapplicable under the circumstances.
View Award