Form l NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTP~,,NT.BOARD Award No. 8031
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7737
 2-MP-CM-'79



Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)

                (

                ( Missouri Pacific Railroad Company


Dispute: Claim of Employes:
        (1) That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company violated Rules 8(b), 26(a), 30, and 117 of the Controlling Agreement and Letter of Understanding of February 14, 1952 when they arbitrarily permitted Carman L. VI. Wise to :fill o. Car Forenatx's job and work his o1~rn job as a Carman, June 1-1-, .176.


        (2) That the Missouri Pacific Railroad Co.npatxy be ordered to compensate Carman J. L. Wilcox in the c-wount of eight (8) hours at the plznative rate for June 4, :1..976.


Firdinas

 The Second Div_sion 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 vrithin the meaning of the Raih~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 waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.


The question raised in this dispute is whether~a carman, who had been assigned to :over the duties of a carman foreman, who was absent due to illness, was obliged to adhere to such supervisor's rest days, etc. In this case, the carman who was performing such duties was utilized as a caiman -at straight time, on the foreman's regular day, after completing a week in the super'visor's position. Thus, he worked t+8 hours that week at straight time for foreman (CIO hours) and earLnan (8 hours). The Claimant, also a carman, was available for work on that same day --- on his rest days, at the overtime rate. While arguments were advanced a,'oeut the applicability of certain rules, the focal point of dispute goes to a Memorandum of Agreement, applicable to caxmen, e:;ecuted in 1954 which prohibited employees who are selected to relieve foremen (who were) ABSENT ON VACATION (such words fully capped in the Memorandum) to their own position until they have taken the rest day of the Foreman's position.
 Form 1 Page 2

 Award No. 8031
 Docket No. 7737
 2-MP-CM-'79

 While there might be substance to the Carrier's contention that the rules cited by the Organization might not be :precisely on point, we find its rationale to justify its actions, i.e. differentiating foremen on vacation from those on illness insufficient basis to justify assignment of the carmen -at straight time, to .~rork in that classification after fulfilling a regular assignment at the foreman level. We shall. not order pay at the punitive rate for the Claimant, but do so at the straight rate for work performed on June 4, 1976, as referenced in this case.

 A Z^7 A R D

 Claim is sustained to the extent set out in the Findings.

NATIONAL RAJMROAD AD<TfTSTIENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By ~ _`-".~'~~.~Prs~---,_~?·~.G~ C~_' .!j-~-~C~-.~'~ ~-~''

 erAiaxie Branch .~ Admm2sLrat:ive Assistant

 Dated it Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day- of August, 1979.