There is no suggestion in this case that the size of the wrecking crew was "not sufficient to handle the job." Quite obviously, the regular wrecking crew could have loaded and unloaded the equipment. The equipment was neither so heavy nor so bulky that all of the wrecking crew working together could not have moved it and additional manpower would not have been required. The wrecking crew, or some of them, could easily have done the work, and their having done so would have extended the time required to complete the Hurricane job by no more than 2 hours. In a letter of May 8, 1951 to the employes about this claim, the carrier said:

" . . As you know, section forces are made available at wrecks and derailments to rebuild damaged road bed and tracks. While waiting to perform their work it is natural, and has been the custom for many years, for them to give some assistance to members of wrecking crew in handling blocks and slings between wrecker cars and point where this equipment is used. This is what was done in the instant case, and it is estimated the section men did not consume more than the equivalent of two hours for each wrecker man in assisting in this work. The claim you have made in favor of ten carmen at Sibert is excessive and unreasonable, for even if the assistance had not been rendered by the track forces certainly the wrecking crew would not have been increased, but work would have been taken care of by the regularly assigned crew. Had this been done, the wrecking crew would have required approximately two hours more to complete the job, and in view of Award No. 1298 we are willing to compensate them for this additional time. We do not feel this would be compromising the claim, as you seem to think, but rather it would constitute full payment due as it is the precise amount of time spent by the section men in assisting the wrecking crew,' (see last paragraph of `Findings,' Award 1298)."

The only logical conc'usion being that the carrier would not have augmented the wrecking crew but would have worked the regular members about 2 hours more, it follows, therefore, that if any additional payment is due, it is due the regularly assigned wrecking crews.

Since it has been demonstrated that the wrecking crew would have been assigned to do this work and that they could have done it in 2 hours or less, their actual loss was not more than 2 hours. Therefore, the carrier's offer to pay them 2 hours was entirely fair and is all that they are entitled to receive.

The carrier submits, on the basis of the foregoing, that applying the test of actual loss to this case shows that the members of the wrecking crew are entitled to the money and that the sum they are entitled to is 2 hours pay.

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 parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

The carrier concedes that ten section laborers augmented the instant wrecking crew for two hours at the scene of the wreck: The record shows" * * the carrier is willing to assume that some carmen are entitled to additional pay because of the work done * * *".

AWARD