The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in

addition Referee Dudley E. Whiting when award was rendered.


PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 6, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'

DEPARTMENT, A. F. of L.-C. I. O. (Machinists)


CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND & PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: 1. That under the terms of the controlling agreement the Carrier improperly assigned Diesel Supervisor U. H. Flippen to the duties of assisting Machinist R. B. Anderson in performing the work necessary in removing, dismantling and reassembling the number one power truck and the removal and applying one pair of wheels at Eldon, Iowa on October 18, 19, 20 and 21, 1962.


2. That accordingly the Carrier be ordered to compensate Machinists H. R. McLean and E. Callopy in the amount of ninety-one and seven twelfths (91 7/12) hours to be equally divided between them.


EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On or about October 18, 1962, the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Co., hereinafter referred to as carrier, experienced a failure on its diesel unit no. 130 at Eldon, Iowa, consisting of a pair of broken wheels in a power truck of the unit. Carrier elected to make the necessary repairs at Eldon, and on October 18, 1962, carrier sent Machinist R. B. Anderson and Carman Robert Abshire, both of whom are regularly employed as such at Silvis, Illinois, along with Diesel Supervisor U. H. Flippen to Eldon to make the necessary repairs.


The work necessary to making the repairs consisted of properly jacking and blocking the unit, removing the No. 1 power truck, dismantling the truck and removing the broken pair of wheels, installing new pair of wheels, rebuild and assemble the truck, install the complete power truck under the unit and remove blocking and jacks. All of said work is considered machinists' work and regularly assigned to and performed by machinists at carrier's Silvis Shop.


The work could not be performed by Machinist R. B. Anderson by himself, a fact that Carrier was well aware of and both Carman Robert Abshire and Diesel Supervisor U. H. Flippen worked along side of Machinist Anderson in performing the work on October 18, 19, 20 and 21, 1962.


On October 20, 1962, carrier sent Machinist R. G. Anderson, who is regularly employed as such at Silvis, to Eldon to assist the force sent on October



4626-12 49 7

    The inference from the record, if any can be drawn, is that the MW Employes were steadily employed by Carrier during the period of the project. Therefore, for this Board to make an Award as prayed for in Parts (2) and (3) of the Claim would be imposing a penalty on the Carrier and giving the MW Employes a windfall-neither of such results is provided for or contemplated by the terms of the contract. To make such an Award, we find, would be beyond the jurisdiction of this Board."


In conclusion, carrier has shown that the organization's claim fails on two counts. First, the machinists at Silvis have no contractual right to work performed at Eldon and, second, the work performed by the diesel supervisor was not beyond the normal scope of his supervisory responsibilities. Further, the organization has claimed an arbitrary windfall in this case and previous awards have ruled that claims for money are not valid unless time is actually lost by the claimants involved.


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.


    Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.


While the Carrier asserts that the diesel supervisor acted only in a supervisory capacity, the evidence supports the claim that he performed mechanic's work in violation of the Agreement.


The fact that claimant's seniority is not at Eldon is irrelevant because of the rules providing for service away from assigned point and the fact that the Carrier chose to assign employes from the claimants seniority point to perform the service required.


With respect to part 2 of the claim, it is obvious that some machinist was deprived of overtime opportunity by such violation of the agreement. It is difficult to ascertain the number of hours actually worked from this record and certainly the time claimed by the employes must encompass premium time and is wholly unrealistic under our decisions. We have concluded that a total of 32 hours pay at pro rata rate divided between the claimants would constitute appropriate reparation for the overtime opportunity lost.


                  AWARD


    Claim sustained to the extent stated in the findings.


              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of SECOND DIVISION


              ATTEST: William B. Jones

              Chairman


                  E. J. McDermott

                  Vice Chairman


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 11th day of December, 1964.