Positions Nos. 104, 111 and 112 have been in existence prior and subsequent to 1927. Positions 113, 115 and 121 when established as new positions were properly classified as Mail Handlers-Second Grade and the rate for said positions was established in conformity with the rates paid for positions of similar kind and class in the same seniority district, namely, other positions of Mail Handler-Second Grade at Sacramento. Obviously, therefore, Rule 5 in no way supports the claim in this docket.

A `temporary assignment' contemplates the fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities of the position during the time occupied, whether the regular occupant of the position is absent or whether the temporary assignee does the work irrespective of the presence of the regular employe. Assisting a higher rated employe due to a temporary increase in the volume of work does not constitute a temporary assignment."

It is apparent that the above-quoted rules are in no way applicable to the claim in this docket.

It appears to the carrier that the petitioner picked at random six positions of Mail Handler-Second Grade at Sacramento and claimed that said positions should be reclassified as Mail Handler-First Grade. Evidence of this fact is found in connection with Positions Nos. 111 and 121; Louis Baker was employed and assigned to Position No. 111 on February 14, 1942, and M. Cereceres was assigned to Position No. 121 on March 22, 1942, and prior thereto was engaged as a trucker at the Sacramento Freight Station.

The carrier submits that the claim in this docket is merely a claim for an increased rate of pay on behalf of the claimants. The matter of increases in rates of pay is not properly referrable to this Board and this Board is without jurisdiction or authority to grant or award increases in rates of pay.

CONCLUSION

The carrier asserts that it has established that the claim in this docket is without basis or merit and therefore respectfully submits that it should be denied.

OPINION OF BOARD: The claimants are classified as Mail HandlersSecond Grade and are employed in the Sacramento Station Mail Room. They received this classification as a result of negotiation, the details of which appear in the record as Form C-21 Final. Form C-21 Final issued in 1927 classifies the mail handlers in the Sacramento Seniority District as Mail Handlers-First Grade and Mail Handlers-Second Grade. At the time of this classification there were three Mail Handlers-First Grade. They worked around the clock performing the work of their positions which included the supervision of the Mail Handlers-Second Grade. In 1928, the three Mail

Handlers-First Grade were reclassified as Mail Foremen. Since that date there have been no employes classified as Mail Handlers-First Grade in the Sacramento Seniority District. The work has been done by the three Mail Foremen and the Mail Handlers-Second Grade. The six claimants contend that they are doing the work of Mail Handlers-First Grade and ask that they be reclassified as such and be given the rate of pay of that classification.

The duties of a Mail Handler-Second Grade at the time Form C-21 Final was agreed upon appear to be as follows: "(a) Unload and sort incoming mail pouches from trains; deliver such mail pouches to the U. S. Post Office located within close proximity of the baggage room. (b) Pick up outbound mail pouches loaded on trucks at the U. S. Post Office; sort said mail pouches and load same on trains. (c) Load and unload baggage on and from baggage cars." The duties of a Mail Handler-First Grade were at that time described as follows: "Supervise and direct the Mail Handlers-Second Grade in the performance of their duties as mentioned above." This recitation of duties of mail handlers at Sacramento at the time Form C-21 Final was agreed upon does not appear to be directly contradicted by the employes' organization.

It is quite evident that the duties of the Mail Foremen were similar to those of the Mail Handlers-First Grade in that they were supervisory only. We are inclined to agree with the carrier that the duties of the two were very similar, if not identical. But this does not answer the question which this case raises. The question is whether claimants are actually doing the work of a Mail Handler-First Grade within the assignments contemplated by Form C-21 Final.

The employes' organization continually refers to the mail handlers' set-up at Oakland Pier Platform. We do not think the set-up at that point has any application to the Sacramento Seniority District. The assignments contained in Form C-21 Final contemplated a more extensive mail handlers set-up at that point. Mail Foremen, in addition to Mail Handlers-First Grade and Mail Handlers-Second Grade, were provided for. New supervisory positions have been created there. This has been due to the fact that Oakland Pier Platform serves more than five times the population as does Sacramento. In any event, the attempt of claimants to compare their duties as Mail Handlers-Second Grade with those in the Oakland Pier Seniority District will not tend to sustain their case. The question resolves itself into this: Are claimants, or any of them, supervising and directing Mail Handlers-Second Grade in the performance of their duties as they are defined in the Sacramento Seniority District?

Claimants urge that they "are required to have a thorough knowledge of mail distribution and be able to promptly and efficiently make necessary separation of sacks for given trains, taking into consideration towns, junctions, connecting points, etc. on the route to be followed by those trains; they must be competent to make any necessary separations of mail placed in a mail storage car or cars, know what mail is to be transferred to connecting trains, in other words, must have all the knowledge necessary to see that mail is properly separated and loaded and generally to direct the activities of the Mail Handlers-Second Grade." We submit that all such duties except "generally to direct the activities of the Mail Handlers-Second Grade," are those designated in the Sacramento Seniority District as the duties: of a Mail Handler-Second Grade, whatever they may be on some other seniority district.

The record fails to recite the facts as to their supervising and directing Mail Handlers-Second Grade in the performance of their duties. Consequently, we cannot say from this record whether or not these claimants are performing the work of a Mail Handler-First Class. We must therefore remand the case for further consideration on the property with instructions to proceed as follows: 1. That the duties of Mail Handlers-First Grade and Mail HandlersSecond Grade in the Sacramento Seniority District be specifically stated if they be any different than when assigned after the adoption of C-21 Final.

2. That a joint check of the duties of each of these claimants be made. 3. That the facts as to the temporary or permanent nature of the work alleged to warrant a reclassification be recited. 4. That the time devoted to work alleged to be that of Mail Handlers-First Grade be calculated. 5. That any other pertinent circumstances be pointed out which bear upon the question whether the claimants should or should not be reclassified as Mail Handlers-First Grade.

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, finds and holds:

That the carrier and the employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

That the record is so indefinite and incomplete that a basis for an affirmative award or a denial thereof does not exist.

AWARD