SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 2 RAILWAY EMPLOYES'
DEPARTMENT, A. F. of L. - C. I. O. (Electrical Workers)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OFFACTS: Electrician S. J. Lutz, hereinafter referred to as the claimant, was regularly employed by the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, hereinafter referred to as the Carrier, as an Electrician at Kansas City, Missouri, with work week Monday through Friday, rest days Saturday and Sunday.
Claimant took his 1965 vacation May 31, 1965 through June 11, 1965. Claimant's birthday was Thursday, June 3, 1965, a vacation day of his vacation period for which he was paid a day's vacation pay. However, Carrier failed to allow him birthday holiday compensation for the day, Thursday, June 3, 1965.
Claim was filed with proper officer of the Carrier under date of July 25, 1965, contending that claimant was entitled to eight (8) hours birthday holiday compensation for his birthday, June 3, 1965, 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 June 1, 1960, as subsequently amended is controlling.
POSITION OF EMPLOYES: It is respectfully submitted that the Carrier erred when it failed and refused to allow claimant eight (8) hours birth-
sidered as a work day of the period for which the employe is entitled to vacation. This means he is entitled to eight hours pro rata for each day while on vacation and nothing more.
The issues raised by this dispute have been given thorough consideration root only by this Carrier but by the Carrier's Committee that negotiated the Agreement of February 4, 1965. In fact, the particular question raised by this dispute was put to the Committee and the question and the Committee's answer thereto is as follows:
Claimants were paid eight hours pro rata for each day while on vacation and are not entitled to any additional compensation.
The Employes ignored the Vacation Agreement in the handling of this. claim on the property. The reason is the Vacation Agreement requires a denial of the claim. It follows that your Board must deny the claim.
All matters contained herein have been the subject matter of correspondence and/or conference.
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 carrer 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.
Claimant was on vacation beginning Monday, May 31 and ending Sunday, June 13, 1965. His birthday was on June 3, 1965 while he was on vaaction. An employe's birthday is a paid holiday. Claimant was paid eight (8) hours, for each day of his vacation, including June 3. Employes are requesting an additional eight (8) hours holiday pay for June 3, 1965.
The same issue is fully discussed in Award No. 5251. The principles and conclusions adopted in Award 5251 are here affirmed.
The majority's decision to sustain the claim presented in Award No. 5258 is based on the principles and conclusions stated in its findings in Award No. 5251. Accordingly, our dissent to Award No. 5251 is equally applicable to Award No. 5258 and is hereby adopted as such.
LABOR MEMBERS' ANSWER TO CARRIER MEMBERS' DISSENT TO
AWARD NOS. 5251, 5252, 5253, 5254, 5255, 5256, 5257 AND 5258
A dissent which merely expresses the chagrin of the dissenters is of little value. The dissent of the Carrier Members to Award Nos. 5251 through 5258 is such a dissent.
The dissent does nothng but review .the arguments presented to the Division which were considered and disposed of in the findings of Award No. 5251.
The findings in Award No. 5251 and the Labor Members' dissents to Award Nos. 5230, 5231, 5232, 5233, 5310 and 5311 point out all of the reasons that Award Nos. 5230, 5231, 5232, 5233, 5310, 5311, 5328, 5329 and 5330 are palpably erroneous. Therefore, Award Nos. 5251, 5252, 5253, 5354, 5255, 5256, 5257 and 5258 should dispose of this issue.