NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee John P. Devaney when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 10, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. OF L. (CARMEN)
THE DENVER AND RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD
COMPANY
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: That Rule 4, paragraph (g), was violated and that Harry Ashley should be paid double time after 16 hours of service when called at Grand Junction, Colorado, to go to Delta, Colorado, March 7, 1938.
EMPLOYES, STATEMENT OF FACTS: Harry Ashley was working on a regular seven day shift in the yard; he worked his shift March 6, from 3:30 P. M. to 11:30 P. M., eight hours. He was called March 7 at 5:00 A. M. to leave at 6:00 A. M.; he got one hour preparatory time according to Rule 9, paragraph (d).
He left Grand Junction at 6:10 A. M.; arrived in Delta at 8:00 A. M., and received two hours' pay according to Rule 9, paragraph (a). This made his eleven hours of service.
He started to work at Delta at 8:00 A. M., his time and one-half beginning at that time. At 1:00 P. M., March 7, he had completed sixteen hours of service in twenty-four hours and should have received double time until 3:30 P. M., the starting time of his regular shift.
of employe's regular shift shall be paid for at the rate of double time except in cases of service for which rules provide other time allowances. Mr. Ashley did not actually work from 11:30 P. M., March 6, to 5:00 A. M., March 7, and from 6:10 A. M. to 8:00 A. M. on March 7.
For the information of the Board, the carrier wishes to state when the initial agreement with System Federation No. 10, effective September 1, 1934, was negotiated, a printed booklet (copy of which is submitted herewith) was issued to all concerned covering the application and proper interpretation of rules of the agreement and in connection with the application and interpretation of Rule 4 (g), the pamphlet shows the following:
While the printed booklet covering the application and proper interpretation of rules of the agreement above mentioned does not bear the signature of any of the Federated Shop Craft committee, nevertheless, they agreed to and were in harmony with the interpretations as issued. The president of the system committee accompanied Assistant General Manager Ray of the carrier to meetings at the various shop terminals on the railroad, at which the officers of the railroad and local shop committees were present and were furnished copies of the printed booklet, and no exception was then taken to the recognized and established application of Rule 4 (g), nor has exception since been taken prior to this case arising. When the agreement was revised, effective November 1, 1935, effort was made by the committee to get the carrier to agree to the so-called standard rule, which request, however, was denied. It will be noted that the interpretation placed on Rule 4 (g) of the carrier and agreed to verbally by the committee provides for payment of double time only after sixteen hours' actual service, service meaning work, not waiting, sleeping or traveling.
The carrier contends there is nothing in Rule 4 (g), or the past application thereof which would entitle Mr. Ashley to double time after 1:00 P. M. on March 7, and further contends that Mr. Ashley's sixteen-hour period of service interpreted as meaning actual work under this rule did not terminate until 4':00 P. M. of March 7, and he did not, therefore, accrue any double time. Furthermore, under a literal application of the rule, he could not have accrued any double time for the reason that with double time starting at 4:00 P. M., March 7, there are thirty minutes beyond the end of the twentyfour hour period starting from 3:30 P. M. of the 6th, his regular starting time.
Mr. Ashley was used in accordance with and compensated under the provisions of Rule 9 of the agreement in the same manner as mechanics have previously been used and paid, not only since September 1, 1934, but also throughout the period from 1922 to 1934.
FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.