Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7530
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7384
 2-KCT-EW-'78



Parties to Dispute: ( (Electrical Workers)

Dispute: Claim of Em loyes:





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.

The Claimant is employed by the Kansas City Terminal Railway Company as an electrician in the Mechanical Department at Kansas City, Missouri, with an assigned work week of Monday through Friday on the 8:00 A.M. to x+:00 F.m. shift. At approximately 9:30 P.M. on Thursday, September 23, 1975, it was reported to the Ceneral Foreman that engine No. 71 would not move under its own power. The engine was moved to the Mechanical Yard where it was inspected by the General Foreman and the Foreman. However, it was not until
 Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 7530

Docket No. 7384

2-KCT-EW-'78


sometime after 11:00 P.M., when Foreman States came on duty and determined that the problem was a faulty wheel slip relay, that repairs were made and engine No. 71 was released for service.

 It is the Organization's position that the regularly assigned electricians (mechanics) perform the work involved in the instant dispute exclusively throughout their regular assignment and did so during overtime hours until the time of the dispute at hand. The Organization asserts that the fact that Claimant was not on duty, since he worked the 8:00 A.M. to x+:00 P.M. shift, does not give the Carrier the right to deprive employes, employed at this point, of overtime that might have accrued them if they had been used to perform the work in question.

 A thorough ,review of the record before us discloses that the work in dispute belongs to employes of the electrical craft as set forth in the Electrical Workers' Classification of Work Rule 67 of the controlling Agreement. The General Foreman and the two Foremen, involved in the instant dispute, performed electricians' work on September 23, 1975, thus depriving the Claimant of his contractual rights to said work. Furthermore, no competent evidence has been presented to support the Carrier's assertion that it has been the practice for the Foreman to perform work, such as we have before us in the instant dispute, whenever an Electrical Worker is not present.

 It has been clearly established that the work in dispute belongs to the Electrical Workers. The Claimant had a contractual right to the work which a Foreman perfoz~med. Accordingly, the claim shall be sustained for two hours and forty minutes (2'40") at the time and one-half rate for September 23, 1975. However, the claim for interest is denied for lack of contract rule support.

 A W A R D

 Claim sustained per Findings.

 Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUS'IT4EIVT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


( osemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 9th day of May, 1978.