Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTTEIV'J_' BOARD Award No. 7961
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7812
2-soo-CM-t79
The Second Division consisted
of
the regular members and in
addition Referee Abraham Weiss when award was rendered,
( System Federation No. 7, Raili,,Tay Employes'
( Department, A. 1'. of L. - C. I. 0.
Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)
(
( Soo Line Railroad Company
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the current agreement the Soo Line R.R. violated Rule Ll,
Shops craft agreement Stevens Point, Wis., Shops over-time board,
Mr. D, G. Foote letter of March
8, 1976
and Mr. T. P. Kearney's
letter at April 21,
1976.
2. That accordingly the Soo Line R.R. be ordered to compensate Carman
Gerald Bnege for 1/2 hour Oct,
a6, lg'r6,
one (1) hour Oct. 28,
1976
and l/2 hour Oct.
30, 1976
at tine and one half.
Findings:
The Second Division
of
the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the err~ploye or eraployes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning
of
the
Raa_h-ray Labor Act as approved June 21,
1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute zraived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The matter before us involves the allegation that Carrier violated the
overtime list and understandings related thereto. The overtime list, composed
of employees requesting opportunity for overtime work, operates on a rotating
basis, without regard to seniority. The employee at the bottom of such list
is given first opportunity to work overtime not accruing to a bulletined
position. Claimant was at the bottom of the overtime list at the time of
the incident.
The situation giving rise to the claim is as
follows:
A foreman's 1 njLZry necessitated shifting personnel until his recovery
and return to work. The regularly assigned road truck driver eras assigned
temporarily to
fill
a, vacancy created by the personnel shifts, and Mr,
Kalpinski was assigned the vacant truck driver position, pursuant to his
written request to the Foreman to
fill
that position, Mr. Y~alpinskx was
Form 1 Award No.
7Q61
Page 2 ~ Docket No. 7:12
2-S00-CM-'79
senior to Mr. Buege, the claimant. On the days in question, when Mr. Kalpinski
filled the truck driver's temporary vacancy, he worked a total of two (2)
hours' overtime. The instant clair: by Mr. Buege is for the two hours'
overtime.
The record indicates that Carrier had previously abolished a road. driver
relief assigrz;ent with the understanding that all. carmen could share eazza.l.ly
in road work and overtime. Inasmuch as P4?°. Kalpinski was nor on the overtime
board, Petitioner maintains that Mr. Buego, the bottom man on the overt!.-^e
list, was ava9_:1.:311e to fill the road driver's vacancy and should have beer!
given the assignrr-ent. Petitioner also bases its claim on str~tements made
by t~-ro carrier officers in connection rY9.th their denial of a previous claim,
that "All employees who are ca.xmen a-1; Stevens Point are entitled to share
equas.ly in the road work and overty:Ae".
Carrier's position is that the overtime work on the three days in Gues Lion
was not extra work but part of the road truck driver's assigrxnent; that it,
had complied w-ith the method of handling tc_rcporary vacancies due to illness
or vacation of less than 30 days by filling the vacancy with the senior
employee making written recp,zest; that the employee assigned to fill the
tem
porary vacancy not only made written request for such a.ss:i.-nment, but t,!_at
he has more seniority than claimant BvzeL;e; that claimant's position at the
bottom of the seniority list did not accord him rights to fill the vacarcy;
and that a Carn:an is taken from the bottom of the overtime list only 7,.,hen
an employee is needed to accorpary, the regular true': driver, or when a
second truck driver is needed.
Carrier also cited two prior instances, one of which involved the
claimant, in which, in accordance with their written request, it assigned
them to fill a vacation vacancy on the same truck driver position involved
in the instant dispute.
Based on the record before us, we find that the Carrier has complied
with the method of assigning work to fill short (temporary) vacancies; that
the senior employee making written request had prior claim on such vacancy;
and that in making such assignment, Carrier complied wi th the overtime list
and did not violate the Agreement. Accordingly, ire must deny the claim.
A W t'L R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTi.~^,wT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Attest: Executive Secretary
~tional Railroad. Adjustment Board
By !-, ~----r--x. ~ ~ _..% ~ ____
oseanarie Brascn - Administrative Assistant
Date at Chicago, Illinois, this lath day of June,
1979.