Foam 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7830
SECOND DIVISION Docket ITO. 7670
2-SCL-CM-'79





Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)




Dispute: Claim of Employes:

















Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that;

The carrier or carriers and the employs or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employs 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.



Carrier consolidated its mechanical operations at Augusta, Georgia with those of the Georgia Railroad into their Haxrisonville Car Shop on September 1, 1.976. Prior thereto Georgia Railroad employees in Harrisonville Car Shop were assigned 7:30 am to 4:00 pm, with thirty (30) minutes unpaid lunch period from 12:00 Hoon to 12:30 pm. Seaboard Coast Line employees on the rip

track in East Boundxy yard were assigned 7:00 am to 3:00 p:n with a tvrenty (20) minute paid lunch period.
F oxm 1 Page 2

Award No.7830

Docket No. 770

2-SGL-CM-'79


Conference was held, August 1, 1976, with the Employee Representatives who had protested assignment of the thirty (30) minute lunch period without pay. Carrier at their request., changed the hours of the one shift of assignment at Harrisonville Car Shop, from 7:30 am - x+:00 .pm to 7:00 am - 3:30 pm. The lunch period vra,s changed from 12 Noon to 12:30 .pm to 11:30 am to 12:00 Noon, The instant claims commenced to be filed thereafter.



"(a) When one shift is employed, the starting time shall be 7:00 AM local time, ox as may be agreed upon at any shop by the Company and employees covered by this agreement. The time and length of the lunch period shall

be arranged by mutual agree~:ent . ...

underscoring supplied)

The above rule does not require that Carrier grant a lunch .period with pay. It does require, however, that Carrier negotiate oven the time and length of the lunch period. Carrier had here fulfilled that obligation.

That there was a failure of mutual agreement is not fatal. As was held in this Division's Award 6691, which involved a similar dispute on this property:

"It was not, therefore, a violation of the Agreement for carrier to institute _pxoceedi.rgs for the establishment of a lunch period without pay for the employees here involved. The Agreement provides only that the time and length of the lunch period will be by mutual agreement. In prior Awards of this Division, we have held that failure to achieve such mutual understanding does ncut carry with it the .power of the Organization to, in effect, veto such changes. Awards 2798 and x+605,

There was no real ,reason in the record to not follow Award 6691, hence, these claims will likewise be denied.

A WAR D

Claims denied.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTNE~,'T BOARD

By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

f y / -pima ·=~''-,~_,,M~ ~ .^ ~. H«~'~'`j~r ° a °:.~_ ~'~ ° fir. "



Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7th day of February, 1979·