1) There was no reasonable alternative. The work involved in this dispute had to be done on those Saturdays;

2) Prior to September 1, 1949 Sunday was an assigned rest day for employes such as are involved in this dispute.

3) The employes such as are involved in this dispute come within the category of the first sentence of Rule 14 (i), which outlines the handling to be given in instances as are herein involved:

4) When found necessary, similar work required on Sunday prior to September 1, 1949 and additional compensation, not to exceed four hours pay, allowed therefor under Rule 14 (b) of the August 1, 1945 agreement;

5) Since the effective date of the 40-hour week agreement, the carrier has applied the provisions of Rule 14 (i) to like employes and compensated them for service of this nature per Rule 14 (b) of the August 1, 1945 agreement.

The carrier petitions the Board to decline the claim on the basis that the work required of the employes involved in this dispute was of the same nature as that required of employes of this classification to perform on Sunday, prior to September 1, 1949, and that under the supplemental agreement of May 13, 1949, paragraph (i), Rule 14, the carrier has the right to have such work performed on Saturday, subsequent to September 1, 1949, allowing therefor punitive compensation of not to exceed four (4) hours pay, in addition to pay for the day included in monthly salary.

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.

Claimants are monthly rated employes who were required to work eight (8) hours on the Saturdays designated in the claim. Carrier paid claimants for four (4) hours' additional time for this work, the claimants, contending they were entitled to eight (8) hours' pay. The Controlling rule is 14(i), agreement effective September 1, 1949, which provides:

"Where employes now have a bulletined or assigned rest day, conditions now applicable to such bulletined or assigned rest day shall hereafter apply to the sixth day of the work week. Where employes do not now have a bulletined or assigned rest day, ordinary maintenance or construction work not heretofore required on Sunday will not be required on the sixth day of the work week."

The work performed included three (3) items of improvements to carrier's shop facilities which are briefly described as follows:

1. Increase transformer capacity account electrical distribution systems overloaded.

2. Convert transfer table from direct current to alternating current operation in order to eliminate condemned wiring and change out the obsolete direct current equipment.

3. Replace trolley feeder wires serving one 15 ton and one 71/2 ton crane, west Diesel Shop.

The work was necessary and urgent. The record shows that it was necessary to be performed on Saturdays and Sundays in order to keep machinery and equipment operating Mondays through Fridays. We do not think the work was emergent in character as that term is commonly used. The work was unusual and extraordinary, and not regularly performed. There were valid reasons why it could not be performed on days other than Saturday and Sunday. We think it is work included within Rule 14(i) and is paid for the same as Sunday work prior to September 1, 1949. Payment for four (4) hours' work in addition to the comprehended monthly rate of monthly rated employes for rest day work is in accordance with payments made for Sunday work prior to September 1, 1949. There was, therefore, no violation of the agreement. Award 1944.

AWARD