SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 6, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. OF L. (CARMEN)
THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILWAY
COMPANY
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: a. That this carrier, on September 22, 1943, violated the controlling agreement and particularly Rule 9, by the arbitrary release of their Pratt, Kansas wrecking crew, subsequent to completing a wrecking assignment at Dalhart, Texas.
b. That the following wrecking service employes, namely, Carmen Ben W. Holland, Ralph W. Laswell and Arthur Schouten, be compensated for eleven (11) hours each at the time and one half rate computed on the basic hourly rate of eighty-eight (88¢) cents per hour, and that Carmen Helpers Earl C. Kettering and Aubrey Smith be compensated for eleven (11) hours each at the time and one half rate computed on the basic hourly rate of seventy (70 ¢) cents per hour.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: This carrier maintains a wrecking outfit at Pratt, Kansas. This wrecker has a regularly assigned crew, composed of carmen and helpers. The employes who were regularly assigned to this wrecker on September 22, 1943, were as follows: Carmen Ben W. Holland, Ralph W. Laswell and Arthur Schouten and Carmen Helpers Earl C. Kettering and Aubrey Smith.
At 6:00 A. M., September 22, 1943, the Pratt, Kansas, wrecking crew was called to go to Dalhart, Texas, to pick up a wreck; arriving at the scene of the derailment at 3:00 P. M., September 22, 1943, commencing work at 4:00 P. M., and working until 6:30 P. M., September 22, at which time they completed picking up the wreck. The wrecking outfit was placed on a siding in the Dalhart, Texas yards. At 7:00 P. M., September 22, the crew was notified they were released from duty until 6:00 A. M., September 23, at which time they would leave on their return trip to Pratt, Kansas, their home station.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: It is the contention of the employee that from the time the claimants in this dispute were relieved from duty at 7:00 P. M., September 22, 1943, subsequent to the completion of that particular assignment and until the time they were again returned to service at 6:00 A. M., September 23, 1943, to be returned to Pratt, Kansas, their home point, such time was clearly and definitely waiting time for the purpose of Rule 9, current agreement, reading as follows:
and interpretation to Rule 9, as covered by Memorandum of Interpretations and Understandings in connection with the agreement of September 16, 1941, reads:
It is the position of the carrier that the second paragraph of the abovequoted provision of Rule 9 and interpretation thereto definitely permits the relieving of wrecking crews from duty and such relief time is not to be paid for providing it amounts to five hours or more and the men are permitted to go to bed either while traveling or at point to which sent to perform work. In the instant case these wrecking service employes completed their work at Dalhart at 7:30 P. M., September 22, 1943, and were relieved until 6:00 A. M., September 23, 1943, at which time the train departed for Pratt, their headquarters. During the period 7:30 P. M., September 22 to 6:00 A. M., September 23, sleeping accommodations were furnished and, therefore, in line with above-quoted rule and interpretation thereto, such relief time, amounting to five hours or more, was not paid for.
We have never on this property paid any employe under Rule 9 of the shopcrafts' agreement any time while riding or at point to which sent when relieved for five or more hours and sleeping accommodations were furnished, and this is the first claim filed by the employes requesting payment for such relief time.
In our discussions leading up to the adoption of Rule 9, this identical question arose and was discussed at which time it was definitely understood between the employes' representatives and the carrier that the five hours or more relief time need not be paid for when employes, while traveling or at point to which sent, were relieved from duty and permitted to go to bed for five or more hours, and for the purpose of recording that understanding, the interpretation appearing under Rule 9 in the Memorandum of Understanding quoted above was made.
As the employes involved were paid strictly in accordance with Rule 9 and interpretation thereto, there has been no violation of the agreement and we respectfully request declination of the employes' claim.
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.
This Division has held under similar rules that time held after completion of work at a wreck was waiting time within the meaning of the rule.
The wrecking crew in this dispute were released from duty at 7:30 P. M. until 6:00 A. M., the following morning, after completion of work at the wreck, and should be compensated under the provisions of the rule as waiting time for that period.