(Advance copy. The usual printed copies will be sent later.)

worm 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMEfr BOARD Award No. 6334
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6157
2-L&N-MA-' 72
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Robert G. Williams when award was rendered.
( System.Federation No. 91, Railway Employes'
( Department, A. F. of L. - C. 1. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Machinists)

( Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

Dispute: Claim of Employes:

(a) That under the current. Agreement, Machinist J. F. Murphy (hereinafter called the Claimant) was improperly compensated for work performed on May 31, 1970.

(b) That the Louisville F Nashville P,-ilroad (hereinafter called the Carrier) be orde. : o pay the '!aimant four (4) hours at straight time rate for the. service performed on May 31, 1970.

Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and 11 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. i

Claimant herein had worked all the hours of his regular weekly assignment. had worked the first rest day and also worked the second rest day. Compensation for the second rest day is the subject of this dispute. Carrier compensated him for that day's work at the rate of time and one-half., whereas claimant is demanding double time under the Provisions of Public Law 91-226 enacted by Congress and signed by the President on April 9, 1970, the pertinent provisions of which are as follows:

"H. Rules changes effective as of the date of notification of ratification of this agreement, as follows:

"4. Pay for service on second consecutive rest day as set forth on Attachment No. 3."

Form 1 Award No. 6334
Page 2 Docket No. 6157
_ 2-h&N-MA-' 72
Attachment No. 3 states:
"All agreements, rules, interpretations and practices, how
ever established, are amended to provide that service per
formed by a regularly assigned hourly or daily rated em
ployee on the second rest day of his assignment shall be
paid at double the basic straight time rate provided he
has worked all the hours-of his assignment in that work
week, except that emergency work paid for under the call
rules will not be counted as qualifying service under this
rule, nor will it be paid for under the provisions hereof."
The Organization contends that claimant, on his second rest day, was sent
from Mobile, Alabama to Flomaton, Alabama to inspect, repair and test locomotive No.
2321, that was being used in switcher service at Flomaton and was due its regular
monthly inspection and testing, and that no "emergency work" as referred to in
Public haw 91-226 was involved.

The Carrier maintains l:ha+ the work performed by claimant on his second rest day was of an emergent nature and, therefore, claimant was exempt from the double time provisions of the rule, time and one-half rate being properly paid.

We have examined the record carefully and find Carrier's argument to the,~,

effect that the work performed on Claimant's second rest day constituted emergency
work not persuasive. Carrier had the obligation to show by substantial evidence that
the assignment involved emergency work. We find no such proof in the record. The
Carrier may have had good reasons for having the inspection and tests performed at
Flomaton by claimant on his second rest day, but this falls short of proving an
emergency. See recent Awards 6282 and 6283, involving the same parties, and Award
6252 involving the same Carrier.

A W A R D

Claim sustained.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of Second Division

Attest: Z. d. /?-/,t Air

Executive Secretary

I

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of July, 1972.,