SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 121, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. OF L. (MACHINISTS)
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: Claim of Machinist P. B. Pipes for five cents differential rate for operating boring mill in the place of O. L. Vannatta on July 17, 1941, under Rule 8, current agreement, Fort Worth, Texas.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Machinist O. L. Vannatta receives a five cents differential which is an arbitrary rate. He was off on July 17, 1941, and his place filled by Machinist P. B. Pipes, who was denied this differential rate.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: On July 17, 1941, Machinist O. L. Vannatta, who operates a boring mill in the machine shop at Fort Worth, Texas, and who receives a five cents differential rate of pay, laid off. His place was accordingly filled by Machinist P. B. Pipes for the day who was paid the regular rate of 860 per hour but claimed this five cents differential account filling Vannatta's place, which was denied. We, therefore, contend that Rule 8 of the current agreement is being violated.
When an employe is required to fill the place of another employe receiving the higher rate of pay, he shall receive the higher rate. * * *"
When the current agreement was written, a memorandum was issued to protect those arbitrary rates then in effect to prevent any reductions. This memorandum reads as follows:
"It is hereby agreed that all excess rates now in effect for various mechanics performing work as defined in Rules Nos. 39a-46a-57a64a-73a and 82a-not specifically mentioned in Rule No. 100 (Rates of Pay) shall be maintained so long as the present occupant continues in his present position; but when such excess rated positions become vacant (except by reason of reduction of forces), the established rate as specified in Rule No. 100 will then apply."
The employes have agreed that Vannatta was on one of these excess rated positions, proven by Mr. Mulholland's letter of September 8, 1941, to Assistant Vice President James, reading in part as follows and submitted as Exhibit A.
1. Memorandum of agreement does cover the case at hand, this memorandum being signed by the employes' president of System Federation No. 121, April 1, 1937.
2. This memorandum clearly states that when the employe on this differential rate is absent from the position, the memorandum is silent as to under what circumstances absence is to be, except reduction in force, that the differential will not apply to other mechanics working this position.
4. The employes understand that this was a differential rate assigned Vannatta in the meaning and intent of memorandum signed April 1, 1937.
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.
It is argued by the employes that Rule 8 is the applicable rule in this case and that it applies regardless of how the rate of an individual was created or continued.
It is argued by the carrier that Rule 8 applies only to those jobs that carry the rates agreed to as set out in Rule 100, and that the rates preserved as a result of the Memorandum dated April 1, 1937, are rates preserved to individuals only, and that none other can receive them.