Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 9570
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9768
2-NRPC-EW-'83
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Eckehard Muessig when award was rendered.
( System Council No. 7
( International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Parties to Dispute:
(
( National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
Dispute: Claim of Employes:
1. That under the current agreement, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation unjustly held Electrician R. Wallace out of service on Saturday,
October 11, 1980 at Beech Grove, Indiana, and unjustly deprived him of
overtime.
2. That accordingly the National Railroad Passenger Corporation should be
ordered to pay Electrician R. Wallace eight (8) hours' pay at time and
one-half the applicable electricians' rate for Saturday, October 11,
1980 in order to make him whole.
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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The essential facts are not in dispute. On Thursday, October 9, 1980, the
Claimant was asked and accepted overtime work for Saturday, October 11, 1980.
On October 10 ,_ after reporting for his regular assignment, the Claimant became sick
and was sent home by the Carrier's nurse. Prior to his departure, the Claimant
was told by his Foreman that since he did not know whether the Claimant would
be sufficiently recovered to work the next day, another employe would be scheduled
to work in his place.
The Organization contends that the Foreman's action was violative of a number
of rules of the parties' controlling agreement. The Board finds, under the fact:; and
circumstances of record, that Rule 13 (F) of the agreement is controlling for the
incident under dispute. The rule is essentially one that requires equal distribution
of overtime among the Carrier's work force. Numerous awards have held that the
equality of such distribution is measured over a reasonable period and not on an
incident-by-incident basis.
Form 1
Page 2
Award No. 9570
Docket No. 9768
2-NRPC-EW-'83
In the instant case, the Organization has a right to know who is going to
work. On the other hand, the Carrier must know with some reasonable certainty
that employees scheduled for work will do so in order to plan its work schedules.
Certainly, under the rules, the Carrier was not obligated to wait until the next
morning to find out if the Claimant was available for work. The Foreman's
conclusion that the Claimant might not be available for work the next day and his
scheduling of someone else to perform this work is not an unreasonable act, not
is it violative of Rule 13(F). The claim, therefore, is denied.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
By.
.~6s~lmarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of July, 1983.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division