The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Thomas C. Begley when the award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 26, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO (Electrical Workers)
EMPLOYES, STATEMENT OF FACTS: Linemen 'and Groundmen Messrs. P. W. Lominack, F. D. Dacus, C. L. Melton, R. L. Allen, Jr., D. C. Hollon, R. A. Massey and J. L. Daugherty, Foreman, members of line gang No. 1, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, were required by the Central of Georgia Railway Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, to work their regular jobs on December 26, 1955 -and January 2, 1956, and were compensated at the straight time rate therefor.
The claimants are regularly assigned Monday through Friday, with Saturday and Sunday as rest days.
December 26, 1955, and January 2, 1956, fell on a Monday, a work day of the regularly assigned work week of the claimants.
Compensation paid by the carrier was credited to the claimants' work days immediately preceding and following Monday, December 26, 1955 and January 2, 1956.
There are many awards on this and other carriers which have long established that the burden of proof rests upon the petitioners. The employes cannot just say the agreement was violated-they must prove it.
In this ex parte submission the carrier has shown that the employes are simply trying to add to the agreement something which is not there. The proper procedure is via Section Six Notice under the Railway Labor Act.
Further, that the employes have not handled this claim properly on the property as shown in the record and carrier's exhibits. The claim should be dismissed.
The carrier has shown that there has been no violation of the agreement, as alleged. The employes have not shown nor can they show that the rules agreement was ever intended to cover that which they are now demanding. The burden of proof rests upon the petitioners, and they must produce probative evidence which to date they have not produced.
The claim clearly has no merit whatsoever, and carrier urges the Board to render a denial award.
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 claimants state that they were improperly paid under Rules of the effective agreement for work performed on December 26, 1955, and January 2, 1956.
Christmas and New Year's Day are recognized by the effective agreement as Holidays on which employes will be paid Holiday pay when the Holiday falls on a work day of the work week of the individual employes.
The rule of the effective agreement provides for Holiday pay on recognized Holidays. This rule, however, is silent as to Holiday pay being paid to the employes on Observed Holidays. Christmas Day was December 25, 1955, and New Year's Day was January 1, 1956, and if these employes worked on December 26, 1955, and January 2, 1956, these days were not recognized Holidays under the effective agreement. Therefore, the employes were not entitled to Holiday pay 'for work performed on these days. This claim must be denied. 2711-8 431