With regard to (b), Helper O'Nan subsequent to his removal from the position of assigned flange fire helper, effective June 4, 1942, worked regularly without any special assignment until he later placed himself by bid on a regular assignment. During the time he held no regular assignment he was used for the extra work on the flange fire with very few exceptions. It might be explained in this latter connection that O'Nan let it be known he preferred not to take the extra flange fire work when he was satisfactorily employed on other piece work operations.

In the handling of this case the employes cited June 24, July 31, August 3, 4, 7, and 26, September 8, 11, and 23, 1942 as specific dates on which O'Nan was available but had not been given the extra helper's work on the flange fire. The carrier's records as reflected on the time cards, pro-rate sheets and pay rolls show the following conditions to have prevailed on the dates mentioned:

A second helper was not used on the flange fire June 24; August 7; September 8, 11, and 23. O'Nan himself was used on August 26, and other helpers were used July 31; August 3 and 4. On the latter three days O'Nan working on other piece work operations, averaged $1.091, $1.107 and $1.06 per hour, respectively, which, in view of his expressed wishes, no doubt accounts for his not being used on the flange fire on the three days in question. In support of the data set forth in this paragraph the carrier submits and makes part hereof its Exhibit No. 4 containing a tabulation of the hours worked and pay received by O'Nan, and the hours worked on the flange fire by a second helper other than O'Nan on the dates mentioned in the employes' submission.

Carrier's Exhibit No. 4 clearly shows the charges of discrimination on six of the days enumerated to be unfounded. On the other three dates, considering the use of O'Nan on flange work would have necessitated his removal from equally lucrative employment, the charge of discrimination assumes rather a ludicrous aspect.

(a)-The evidence shows that two helpers are needed on the flange fire during less than 20 per cent of the total shop hours worked, which evidence the employes have not denied and cannot contradict.

(b)-Authoritative rulings in respect of the application of rules cited by the employes show conclusively that said rules do not support the employes' claim or argument.

(d)-There was no discrimination against Helper O'Nan and carrier emphatically denies the implications in connection therewith.

(e)-There is no showing that O'Nan or any other helper actually lost compensation as a result of discontinuance of one flange fire helper position, in view of which no injury can be claimed.

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.

The carrier was in error in having deprived Helper Fergason of the flange fire helper's work, May 4, to June 4, 1942, and that part of the claim will have to be sustained.

In regard to the second part of the claim, Rule 81 provides "sufficient competent help will be furnished on flange fires." It was the duty of the carrier to furnish sufficient competent help. This does not mean that any certain number of helpers must be assigned, only, sufficient help to perform the work.

The record is in conflict as to whether or not sufficient competent help was assigned. This case will be remanded back to the parties to ascertain the facts and for settlement in accordance with this award.

AWARD