The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in ad
dition Referee D. Emmett Ferguson when award was rendered.
SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 152, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. of L.-C. I. O. (Machinists)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: D. F. Small, hereinafter referred to as the claimant, is employed as a machinist, by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, at the carrier's New York Service Plant, New York City, New York, on the New York Region.
The claimant is a regularly assigned machinist, Service Plant, New York, tour of duty 3:59 P. M. to 11:59 P. M., rest days, Monday and Tuesday, rate of pay $2.262 per hour.
On Monday, October 22, 1956, the claimant's assigned rest day, he attended court as a witness for the carrier from 10:00 A. M. to 2:00 P. M., for which he was allowed six (6) hours at the straight time rate of pay, which included two (2) hours' travel time.
On Tuesday, October 30, 1956, the claimant's rest day, he attended court as a witness for the carrier from 10:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M., for which he was allowed eight (8) hours at the straight time rate of pay, which included two (2) hours' travel time.
On Wednesday, October 31, 1956, the claimant attended court as a witness for the Carrier from 10:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M., and was relieved from his regular assignment on the 3:59 P. M. to 11:59 P. M. shift. For this day he was allowed eight (8) hours at the pro rata rate of pay.
The carrier asserts, therefore, that the applicable agreement between the parties, particularly Rule 4-K-1, cannot be changed or revised by either the unilateral action of one of the parties or by an award of your Honorable Board.
It is respectfully submitted that the National Railroad Adjustment Board, Second Division, is required by the Railway Labor Act, to give effect to the said agreement, which constitutes the applicable agreement between the parties and to decide the present dispute in accordance therewith.
The Railway Labor Act, in Section 3, subsection (i), confers upon the National Railroad Adjustment Board the power to hear and determine disputes growing out of "grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements concerning rates of pay, rules or working conditions." The National Railroad Adjustment Board is empowered only to decide the said dispute in accordance with the agreement between the parties to it. To grant the claim of the employes in this case would require the Board to disregard the agreement between the parties hereto and impose upon the carrier conditions of employment and obligations with reference thereto not agreed upon by the parties to this dispute. The Board has no jurisdiction or authority to take any such action.
The carrier has established that there has been no violation of the applicable agreement, and that the claimant is not entitled to the compensation which he claims.
Therefore, the carrier respectfully submits that your Honorable Board should deny the claim of the employes in this matter.
FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that: 3160-12 444
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.
It is clear from the record in this docket that claimant was entitled to be paid time and one-half for October 22 and 30, which were his rest days and for November 1 when he was actually in service 15 hours. The sole question remaining is whether he is entitled to be paid time and one-half for Wednesday, October 31.
Rule 4(K) i, paragraph 2 provides "employes will not be paid less for this service than their bulletined hours at home station at hourly rate as provided in the Rate Schedule". The organization urges the pay for October 31 should be at time and one-half because the service was performed at a time outside his bulletined hours.
The claimant received his regular hourly rate for this service so it cannot be said that he received less than his bulletined hours.
Claim sustained as per findings for October 22, October 30, and November 1st.