Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJTtTSTiY1ENT BOARD Award No. 7I+78
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7312
2-GII&H-CM-' 78
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Abraham Weiss when award was rendered.
( System Federation No. 2, Rail.vay Employer`
( DepaxWment,
111.
F, of Z. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
(
( Galveston, Houston and Henderson Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of T'm-.?lo;,res:
1. That the Galveston, Houston and Henderson Railroad Company violated
Article III of the Agreement of June
5, 1962,
wf!en Carma.n Vlilli_ua
H. Brown, Galveston, Texas, saws riot given proper notice t'_lat his
position would not z~roxlk. on tile Labor Day Holiday, Se- pte:rbex 1,
1975.
2. That accordingly, the Galveston, Houston and Henderson Railroad
Company be ordered to compenr4lL;. Car_nran Bra,.-,n in tile amount of
eight hours
(8`
) at time arid one-half ,.ate account his working hi.,:
regular position on the labor
D::~;;r
Holiday, Septerrex 1,
1975.
Findings:
The Second Divis_on of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier ox carriers and. the employe ox employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe within 'she meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21,
1937.
This Division of the Adjustment Hoard. has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said, dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
On Friday,
August
29
and Saturday, August 30.
1975,
respectively,
Carrier posted bullet-ins at its Galveston, Texas location indicating thaw no
work would be verfonnlo.d on
Monday,
September 1, Labor
Day.
Claimant Vi llicvn
H. Brown is assigned to the 11 y~.ro. to
7
a.m. shift, Thursday through i:~ond~.y;
his rest days are Tuesday and Wcd?=esaay. Clwin.c:nt, therefore, -e,-as at work
on the days the bulletins "annW
Lung'"
work ore Labor Pay were posted. Claimant
reported fox work on Labor D=~y--vhe onJ.-y employee who did so--arid as s, result
submitted a claim fox eight hours` pay at ta;ne and one-half for working on a
holiday.
Petitioner alleges that Claimant Brawn did not receive proper notice that
his position waid not be worked labor Day and that this constitutes a
violation of Article II
Of
tt?.e Al-i'C=WT?!GT1t, ;;:11.C1? requires 'snot less than five
(5)
working days' advance notice shall be given before ...positions are aaolished."
Form 1
Page 2
Award
NO. 71+'T8
Docket No.
7312
2-Gi3&H-CTS-'
78
Carrier maintains, among other arguments, that Article III is not
applicable, since the Jobs were not abolished but blanked fox' the holiday, a
right recognised. by the Board in previous decisions; that according to the
notice no er~.p:Loyee eras authorized to work on Labor Day and that no en.ployee
except tine C7_a:Ln~wnt reported and/or Wo.rked on that holiday; and that the
posted notices -vrere the sr:,.~re or sV~_mila.r to previous bulletins dealing s~°ith
holidays including the
bulletin posted P~11ay
23, 1975
referring to Memoxial
Day, when all et:lployees including the Claimant did not work.
Carrier postad the usual notice annulling the Switch Engine assignments
at Galveston, Tex-as for one day,
September
1, 1975
(Labor Day). Clav~na nt
was the only car:lan that reported for work. Though no other employees
reported, Clai:wnt remained on duty. The claim
fo-O
pay for that day was
denied giv_ng rise to the :instant cla,~:,i, alleging violation of the June-
5,
1962 agxeernent which requires five wol~ing days' notice before abolis',Lin,-
positions
o?° reducing forces.
This Board has 1on-
r
held that Carrier has the right to work ox rout work
erl,)lo~Y-ees on hoa_ica.:~,ys, absent
specific x',,,1es to the contm:,N,". Carrier
the unrefrrted :; t Lte-rlent tF.at the sa.::.c~ type bu l let:inu as posted for the holiday
in question hav,re alvra.~,.rs becn aceeptec~_ by the e~;,~ao~oes, including C1ai:::wnb,
as notice tr_a;U their
sC:x",7J_C'.GS
would not be
Y'C'.Cju1?."C:CL.
(cwxx:LerrS EXil'!.b1'G L
sheets
3
and
4
corroborates
Carriexrs statement).
The burden o
~ proof rests with the Petitioner. Petitioner has failed
to support the aL~__:`;ai;ion that the AL r eemenv was violated.
A W A E D
Claim denied.
Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
TTATIOTZU RAILROAD AJJUSTKEA'I' BOARD
By Order of Second Division
,..-.,~'.°:`~'~rx.~r. ~_._:.t.~.._ ~..~
~.._
s~ma
By
/7
Z,
;c'ie bia:..sch - Administrativey Assistant
Dated at' Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of February, 1978.