was, in fact, given the call to perform the service in advance of the hours of the regular week-day assignment, and for that reason Rule 9 (c) has no application from a notified or caled basis. Had Mr. Owsley been called for duty at 6:45.A.M., the Carrier does not dispute that Rule 9 (c) would apply, and for the first 2 hours of service he would have been entitled to 3 hours' pay, but when called in advance of the starting time of the week-day assignment, it is the Carrier's position that Rule 9 (d) specifically applies because of the provision that time worked before or after the limits of the regular week-day assignment will be paid for in accordance with overtime and call rules.

The foregoing application was accorded the claimant in this case because he was given 3 hours' pay for the service from 5:00 A.M. to 6:45 A.M., in line with Rules 9 (d) and 10 (c), and because he was not notified or called within the limits of the week-day assignment he was continued on duty at the regular pro rata hourly rate. This is in line with the long established custom and practice on this property, and the instant claim is the first instance, to the knowledge of the Carrier, where payment has been sought other than as allowed.

The attention of the Board is further called to the provision of Rule 9 (c) which provides for a continuation of the regular hourly rate following the application of the penalty rate "after the second hour of each tour of duty."

In view of the foregoing, we respectfully submit that the claimant has been properly compensated under the applicable rules of the agreement, and for that reason the claim should be declined.

OPINION OF BOARD: There is no dispute here as to the facts. The only question is as to the interpretation of certain rules of the agreement, 9 (a), (c) and (d), and 10 (c), which read as follows:

"SUNDAY AND HOLIDAY WORK: Rule 9 (a). Except in relay offices time worked on Sundays and the following holidays, namely: New Year's Day, Washington's Birthday, Decoration Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas (provided when any of these holidays fall on Sunday, the day observed by the State, Nation, or by proclamation shall be considered the holiday), shall be paid for at the regular pro rata hourly rate when the entire number of hours within the limits of the regular week day assignment are worked.

(c) When notified or called to work on Sundays and the above specified holidays, a less number of hours than constitute a day's work within the limits of the regular week day assignment, employes shall be paid a minimum allowance of two hours at overtime rate for two hours work or less, and at the regular pro rata hourly rate after the second hour of each tour of duty.

"(d) Time worked before or after the limits of the regular week day assignment will be paid for in accordance with overtime and call rules."

"OVERTIME: Rule 10 (c). NOTIFIED OR CALLED: Employes notified or called to perform work not continuous with the ending of their regular work period will be allowed a minimum of three hours for two hours work or less, and if held on duty in excess of two hours, time and one-half will be allowed on the minute basis, except that the bulletined hours of service of telegraphers at offices where one shift only is employed, may be established to permit the meeting or starting of regular scheduled trains on their time-table not more than one hour before the commencing time shown in this agreement. Such time (one hour or less) required to report before 6:00 A.M. will be paid for on the minute basis at the rate of time and one-half."

The claimant had regularly assigned hours from 6:45 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. on week days. He had no Sunday assignment. On Sunday, August 27, 1944 he was called to work at 5:00 a.m. and worked until 1:15 p.m. The carrier paid him for one call figured as two hours at time and one-half, 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m., and from 7:00 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. at the pro rata rate. The claimant contends that for the time between 5:00 a.m. and 6:45 a.m. he should have been paid on the basis of a call for a minimum of two hours at time and one-half on the theory that this was time worked before the hours of his regular assignment, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 (d) should have been paid for as provided in Rule 10 (c). Then at 6:45 a.m. which was the hour for the commencing of his regular week day assignment he claims that he came under the provisions of Rule 9 (e), and, not having been worked on Sunday within the limits of his regular week day assignment, was entitled to a minimum allowance of two hours at the overtime rate and thereafter at the regular pro rata rate.

The claimant was entitled to be paid under two separate rules. Firstly, he was entitled to be paid under the call rule for the work performed before the time fixed for the beginning of his regular assignment; secondly, he was entitled to pay for work performed commencing at 6:45 a.m., his regular assigned starting time on his week day assignment, which work, not having been continued to the limit of the regular week day assignment, should have been paid for as provided in Rule 9 (c). In no other way can the provisions of the various rules be harmonized, and can we be saved from falling into the error noted as Example F, cited in Interpretation No. 3 to Supplement No. 13 to General Order No. 27 of the Director General of Railroads, dated April 25, 1919.

This identical question has been decided in accordance with the views which we here express in two well reasoned opinions of this Board. Awards 813 and 2205. We have no question of the correctness of those decisions. Even if we did have, we would doubt the advisability of deciding the matter differently today. A construction of a rule which is not unreasonable should be maintained. For it is important that neither the carrier nor the employes should be left in uncertainty as to their rights. See the memorandum of Referee Garrison accompanying Award 1630.

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

The claim should be sustained.

AWARD