phones" as an integral part of those installations without prior protest or complaint from its electricians or their representative organization, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, until May 18, 1960, when a similar claim was filed on carrier's Coast Lines, as mentioned hereinabove, who cannot now be heard to protest ignorance of a practice so long and so firmly established. The carrier further states that its practice is in full accord with the principles firmly established by prior awards of this and other Divisions of the National Railroad Adjustment Board.

The only rule cited by the employes in support of their claim in the instant dispute is Rule 119 of the General Shop Crafts' Agreement effective August 1, 1945, which is quoted in the carrier's statement of facts. This rule may be searched in vain for any indication that it purports to allocate to employes of the communications department the work of installing and maintaining signal systems such as the CTC (TCS) system herein involved, which work is reserved to this carrier's signal department employes by the scope rule of their agreement and has been customarily and traditionally performed by those employes since the first CTC system was installed on the carrier's property in 1931.

Without prejudice to its position as previously stated that the instant claim should either be dismissed, remanded or denied, the carrier further asserts that the penalty payment of fifty (50) hours at punitive time and one-half rate as contemplated by Item 2 of the employes' claim, is excessive. The signalmen who installed the phones involved actually consumed a total of only thirteen and one-half (13 i/z) hours in performing the work. General Chairman McLennan, in the fourth paragraph of his letter of March 3, 1961, to carrier's Assistant to Vice President L. D. Comer claims that "This installation time was arrived at by the Santa Fe people whose duty it is to make estimates of phone installations and their findings determine that 50 hours is a fair estimate of the total time necessary for these installations." As stated in Mr. Comer's letter of April 19, 1961, (quoted on pages 8 and 9 of this submission) carrier's records show that six phones were installed on this territory, consuming a total of thirteen and one-half hours and there was no necessity to estimate the time involved. Further the organization has not identified the men who made the estimate or established their qualifications to make such estimates.

The carrier further asserts that the employes' claim is excessive in that it seeks payment at the time and one-half rate of pay contrary to the well known and firmly established principle of this and other Divisions of the National Railroad Adjustment Board that the proper compensation for work not performed is the pro rata rate.

In conclusion, the carrier states that the employes' claim in the instant dispute should be either dismissed or denied for the reasons expressed herein.

The carrier is uninformed as to the arguments the brotherhood may advance in its ex parte submission, and accordingly reserves the right to submit such additional facts, evidence or argument as it may conclude are necessary in reply to the brotherhood's ex parte submission or any subsequent oral argument or briefs presented by the brotherhood in this dispute.

FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

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

AWARD