DISYUTIC.-"(a) The Board is requested to determine the maximum number of hours provided for lit schedule marked (a), which is attached.
"tb) Shall the time einployes are held at turn-around points or stations be deducted when determining tile maximum hours in schedule assignments?
"(c) Shall assignments be restricted to the actual number of hours required to perform necessary service?
"(d) Shall employes be compensated for service performed outside of the regular established assignment, and shall such compensation be paid retroactively from the time that the alleged violation occurred?"
FINDINGS-The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole reond and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier and the employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employers within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June '1, 1934.
This division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The parlies to said dispute were given due Dotice of hearing thereon."Schedule marked (A)" referred to in item (A) of matter in dispute is found to be a document exhibiting assignment of dining-service employees and giving time that trahis be due to depart from and to arrive at certain termini, togeliter wiih the time that employees are regularly required to be oil duty en route, including, in some instances, preparatory time at beginning and/or coding of tell).
The preparation of said Selie(lule (A) is shown to have been participated ht by the accredited representative of the employees, and it is rectified by both parties to be part of Agreement between them bearing effective date February 7. 1927, with three addenda thereto effective January 1, 192:1, May 1, 1929, and July 1, 1934, respectively, governing wages, hours of service, and working conditions of employees therein designated.
The "maximum number of hours provided for in Schedule marked (A)" varies in different assignments according to the difference in service schedules shown therein, and it is found that ill the. establishment of on-duty dote the sole consideration vvas service requirements.
Complainant party cites from Agreement the following rules, to wit:
(a) Decided to be variable as comprehended in Article 2 of the Agreement cited.
(b) Provided time held at turn-around points or stations be included in the on-duty time specified in Schedule A it is not deductible for any purposes of compensation.
(c) Assignments shall be established and maintained in accordance with carrier's service requirements.
(d) Yes; in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 of existing Agreement. It is not shown that there are any compensation arrears.
By Order of Third Division:NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
INTERPRETATION No. 1 TO AWARD No. 39,
DOCKET No. DC-41
(a) Article No. 2 of the Agreement between the parties governs in the designation of the number of hours constituting a month's work per schedule marked (A) appended to the Agreement, and is declared by Award No. 39 to provide variable maximum numbers of hours for the respective assigned schedules.
(b) Article No. 2 of said Agreement governs also in respect to the identification of the hours to be considered in determination of the maximum hours in schedule assignments being specified therein to be the hours as designated in regular assigned schedules, and is declared in the Award to provide that if time held at turn around points or stations be included in the on duty times of the assigned schedules, it is not deductible for any purposes of compensation.
(c) The Award specifically gives answer to petitioner's question (c) declaring that assignments shall be established and maintained in accordance with carrier's service requirements. The carrier's service requirements are determined by the carrier, the establishment of which are matters over which the Third Division has no jurisdiction.
(d) The Award gives specific answer in the affirmative to the first query of petitioner's question (d), and states directly in reply to the second query of said question (d) that there had not been shown any compensation arrears. No further interpretation is necessary.
General. The Award and these interpretations base upon the terms of the agreement in existence between the parties. The more specific designations requested in the Application for an interpretation of Award No. 39, Docket No. DC-41, etc., accompanying your letter of August 10th, 1935, are matters to which there may be agreement between the parties to this dispute, but which are outside the jurisdiction of the Third Division of the National Railroad Adjustment Board.