NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Curtis G. Shake, Referee
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: .Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood:
(a) That the Carrier incorrectly paid Carl Schmidt, Union Station Maintainer, for work performed on January 11 and 25, and February 8 and 15, 1943; and
(b) That Carl Schmidt be paid the difference between what he received at straight time rate and what he was entitled to receive at the rate of time and one-half time for eight hours on each of the above dates.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Carl Schmidt held a regular bulletined position as station maintainer. The bulletin advertising the position to which he was assigned provided for an assignment of eight hours per day-3:30 P. M. to 12:00 midnight, 30 minutes for lunch, six days per week -Monday being assigned as his day off. The rate of pay for this position was $200.60 per month.
On completion of his assignment at 12:00 midnight on Sunday January 10, Sunday January 24, Sunday February 7, and Sunday February 14, 1943, Carl Schmidt was instructed and required by the Carrier to report for work at 8:00 A. M. on Monday January 11, Monday January 25, Monday February 8, and Monday February 15, 1943. The claimant complied with instructions and did perform work-eight hours each day-on his regular days off, Monday January 11, Monday January 25, Monday February 8, and Monday February 15, 1943.
For service rendered on these dates claimant received pay at the straight time rate, whereas he was entitled under Rule 33 to be paid at the rate of time and one-half when notified or called to perform work not continuous with the regular day's work period.
The claim for Carl Schmidt was handled as provided for in the agreement up to and including the highest officer designated to handle same and the Carrier declined to allow the claim. The Employes' representative made request upon the Carrier to submit the claim as an unadjusted dispute to the Third Division, National Railroad Adjustment Board, and the Carrier declined to do so.
There is an agreement in effect between the parties which is hereby made a part of this Statement of Facts.
In view of the information in the Superintendent's letter of May 4, 1943, quoted above, showing that the Organization's representatives themselves did not consider Rule 33 a seventh day rule inasmuch as they presented such a rule along with their proposed Sunday and Holiday rule, it is quite evident that there is no basis for their claim. The Carrier, therefore, requests that the Employes claim, in this case, both Sections (a) and (b) be denied.
OPINION OF BOARD: The question presented by this case is identical with that disclosed by Docket No. MW-2589, decided by Award No. 2557. On the authority of that award, and for the reasons therein stated, it is concluded that the claimant herein is entitled to prevail.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, fords and holds:
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and