Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
SECOND DIVISION
Award No. 13188
Docket No. 13056
97-2-95-2-88

The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Margo R. Newman when award was rendered.


( Transportation Communications International Union PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:












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.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.


Form 1 Award No. 13188
Page 2 Docket No. 13056
97-2-95-2-88

In response to a derailment at South Brewer, Maine, Carrier sent a road truck and Carman to that location to perform rerailing as well as an Assistant Manager to observe and begin learning rerailing procedures. This claim arises from the fact that the Assistant Manager helped the Carman moved the rerailer during his observation period.


The Organization argues that the Manager performed Carman's work in violation of Rule 28(a), which provides:




The Organization notes that Claimant was qualified to assist in the rerailing, and should have been assigned this overtime, citing Second Division Awards 9117, 9147, 12887.


Carrier contends that the Organization failed to sustain its burden of proving that moving a piece of equipment is work which belongs to it exclusively, citing Second Division Awards 11984, 12505, 13108. Further, it argues that any activity performed by the Assistant Manager falls within the parameters of the de minimis principle, relying upon Second Division Awards 12238, 11239, 12476, and that Claimant suffered no loss of earnings. See Second Division Award 12656.


This record is devoid of any facts which support a finding that the Assistant Manager performed any task other than admittedly helping the Carman move the rerailer. There is no evidence that this took other than a brief period of time. Thus, even though the work in issue may well be outside the scope of managerial responsibility, it falls squarely within the de minimis principle and does not justify compensation of Claimant, who suffered no loss of earnings, for the requested six hours of overtime pay.




    Claim denied.

Form 1 Award No. 13188
Page 3 Docket No. 13056
97-2-95-2-88

                        ORDER


This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of Second Division


                        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of December 1997.