Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 12957
Docket No. 12771
95-2-93-2-12.7
The Second Division consisted of the regular members and :.n
addition Referee Robert Richter when award was rendered.
(International Brotherhood of Electrical
( Workers
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Consolidated Rail Corporation
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim and grievance on behalf of Electrician J. P.
Yoder, employed by the Consolidated Rail Corporation at
Enola, PA Diesel Terminal, instituted by the Organization
by letter dated January 3, 1992, to Shop Manager J. E.
Baranko, which reads as follows:
Dear Sir:
I hereby file a grievance on behalf of Electrician J. P.
Yoder for violation of Rules 4-D-2 and 4-E-1, and past
practice, for the following reason.
On November 07, 1991 Electrician J. P. Yoder ordered to
go for a hearing test at 1 pm on his relief day by Shop
Manager J. R. Baranko. Electrician J. P. Yoder's regular
assigned working hours are Sat. through Wed. 11 p.m. to
7 a.m. Other men who worked the same assigned working
hours were given hearing tests on their tour of dutv, and
Electrician Yoder was not given the same opportunity.
In view of the above, the organization contends that the
claimant be compensated (3) three hours at time and one
half.
CLAIMANT: J. P. Yoder'"
FINDINGS:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved
in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee within the
meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
Form 1 Award No. 12957
Page 2 Docket No. 12771
95-2-93-2-127
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing
thereon.
Claimant was assigned as an electrician at Enola Terminal with
working hours of 11:00 p.m. until 7:00 a.m. with Thursdays and
Fridays as rest days.
OSHA Regulation 29 CFR Sec. 1910.95 requires employees be
given hearing tests. As a result,the Carrier's Hearing Van was
placed at Enola from June 10 through June 21, 1991 and between
September 13 and 18, 1991. All employees were notified of the
presence of the van and were requested to have their hearing tested
during the above periods.
Because the Claimant failed to take the test the carrier was
obligated to schedule an appointment with a local doctor to gi-:e
the Claimant his hearing test. The Carrier made an appointment for
10:00 a.m. on November 6, 1991. Claimant requested it be changed
to 2:00 p.m. on November 7, 1991, which was done.
The Organization filed this claim for three hours at time and
one half for violation of Rules 4-D-2 and 4-E-1. The rules read as
follows:
1'4-B-1(a) Time worked by any employee in excess of eight
(8) hours in any 24-hour period, computed from the
starting time of the employee's regular shift, will be
considered as overtime and will be paid for at the rate
of time and one-half, except that double time will be
paid for time worked in excess of sixteen (16) hours in
such 24-hour period."
"4-E-1. Employees called, who report for work, shall
be paid not less than three (3) hours' as provided in
Rule 4-B-1."
Numerous Awards have held that taking a physical or hearing
test are not work or service as contemplated by the Agreement. :n
Second Division Award 12234 involving Carmen taking hearing tests
the Board held:
Form
1
Award No. 12957
Page 3 Docket No. 12771
95-2-93-2-127
"All time during which an employee is required to
give up his own pursuits in order to satisfy a
requirement of the Carrier is not necessarily work or
service time, as those terms are used in the Agreement.
The Agreement, in Rule 6(d), recognizes that some time,
such as attending court, deadheading, travel time, etc.,
might be compensated by special allowances. We read Rules
6 and
7
to apply only when the employee is actually
performing work or service. There is ample arbitral
precedent holding such time is not work or service, as
contemplated by the Agreement. See Second Division
Awards 1162 and 3086. We concur with those decisions,
and find the time spent in this case was, therefore, not
subject to the overtime Rules."
After careful review of the record before this Board, we
concur in the above cited Award. The Board also wishes to note
that Claimant had ample opportunity to take his hearing test while
on duty. Claimant by his own personal decision cannot create a
situation where the Carrier is required to pay a penalty in order
to comply with OSHA Regulations.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified
above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant not be
made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Second Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of September 1995.