The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee David Dolnick when award was rendered.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Electricians Charles Ranger and George Larkin hereinafter referred to as the claimants, were regularly employed by the Pullman Company, hereinafter referred to as the carrier, and regularly assigned as Electricians in Carrier's Sunnyside Yard, Long Island City, New York. Claimants took their 1965 vacations January 4, 1965 to January 24, 1965 inclusive and February 21, 1965 to March 6, 1965 inclusive, respectively. Claimant Ranger's birthday was Wednesday, January 20th and Claimant Larkin's birthday was Sunday, February 21st, a vacation day of their vacation period for which they were paid a day's vacation pay. However, Carrier failed to allow them birthday holiday compensation for their birthdays.
Claim was filed with proper officer of the Carrier under date of May 6, 1965, contending that claimants were entitled to eight (8) hours birthday holiday compensation for their birthdays January 20th and February 21st, respectively, in addition to vacation pay received for that day and subsequently handled up to and including the highest officer of Carrier designated to handle such claims, all of whom declined to, make satisfactory adjustment.
The Agreement effective July 1, 1948 as subsequently amended is controlling.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: It is respectfully submitted that the Carrier erred when it failed and refused to allow claimants eight (8) hours birthday
Obviously, if the Organization believed it already had won the principle of considering a holiday falling on a workday within the work week of one of its members who is on vacation as other than a vacation day, the Organization would not be serving such a demand at this time.
CONCLUSION: The Pullman Company has shown in this submission that the claim is improperly before the Board account failure of the Organization to observe the time limits governing such matters and, further, that the instant claim is entirely lacking in Agreement or other support. The Company requests that the claim be denied.
All data presented herewith in support of the Company's position have heretofore been submitted in substance to the employes or to their representative and made a part of this dispute.
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.
On May 6, 1965 the Employes presented the following claim to the Carrier
The claim was denied by the Carrier's highest appeal officer for, among other reasons, the following:
Rule 51 provides that an employe must file his claim "within 60 days from the date of the alleged unjust treatment or alleged rule violation * * *" Claimant's birthdays, for which compensation is requested, occured on January 20, and February 21, 1965. The agreement providing for the employes' birthdays
as paid holidays was signed by the parties on March 2, 1965. The claim was not filed until May 6, 1965, 65 days after the agreement was signed.
Employes contend that neigther the Claimants nor the Local Committee were aware of the March 2nd Agreement until later, "so is was impossible for any of the employes covered by the Agreement to know what they were entitled to under the Agreement until furnished with a copy of same." They also state that it was necessary to give the Carrier a reasonable time to meet its obligations.
Neither contention is valid. Neither may explain away or excuse the specific obligation provided for in Rule 51. Employes had sixty (60) days after March 2, 1965 to file the claim. Having failed to do so within the time limits, the claim is not properly before the Board.