-40', 265 Award No. 5128
Docket No. 4838
2-DT&I-CM= 67





The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in

addition Referee Paul C. Dugan when award was rendered.




SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 57, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'

DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO (Carmen)


DETROIT, TOLEDO AND IRONTON RAILROAD COMPANY



1. That under the controlling agreement the Carrier improperly denied Carmen H. Herndon and W. E. Grube compensation for Christmas Day, December 25, 1963.



EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Carmen H. Herndon and W. E. Grube, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, are regularly employed by the Detroit, Toledo & Ironton Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, at Rouge Yard, Dearborn, Michigan.


Claimants were regularly assigned to a work week of Monday through Friday, with Saturday and Sundays as rest days, first shift, from 8 A. M. to 4 P. M. at Rouge Yard, Dearborn, Michigan.


On Tuesday, December 24, 1963, claimants reported for work at 8:00 A. M. and worked a full eight (8) hour shift. On Thursday, December 26, 1963, claimants reported at 8:00 A. M. Claimant Grube worked one and one-half (11/2) hours and Claimant Herndon worked one-half (1/2) hour. Accordingly, claimants had compensation paid them by the carrier credited to the work days immediately preceding and following the holiday, Christmas Day, December 25, 1963, which fell on Wednesday, a work day of the claimants' work week.


Carrier has refused to compensate the claimants for the holiday, because they did not work a full eight (8) hour shift on Thursday, December 26, 1963.











' Section 3 of Article III of the August 19, 1960 Agreement: ". . . if com-



W, Article to this dispute. Therefore, claimants met the requirement of said
! Section 3 of said Agreement by having compensation paid them by the Car-





and were not available in conformity with Paragraph 2 of Section 2 of said Article III of the August 18, 1960 Agreement.










It is obvious that the above quoted paragraph applies to "other than regularly assigned employes," and inasmuch as there is no dispute in the record that claimants herein were "regularly assigned" employes, this paragraph of the Agreement does not apply, and Carrier's contention is thus without merit.

Claimants, having met the requirements of the controlling Agreement in regard to holiday pay, are therefore entitled to said holiday pay.







ATTEST: Charles C. McCarthy
Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of March, 1967.

Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, 111. Printed in U.S.A.
5128 7