NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Prior to September 1, 1949, the Carrier maintained at its Clifton Forge, Virginia, Yard a 'position known as Serial Record Clerk, being assigned six days per week, Monday through Saturday, Sunday being assigned as the day of rest.
On September 1, 1949, the revised Agreement embodying the so-called "40-Hour Week Rules" became effective, the Carrier designating Serial Record Clerk work as five-day service and assigning the Serial Record Clerk position number A-146 in this five-day service to work Monday through Friday, assigned rest days Saturday and Sunday, assigned hours 7:00 A. M. to 3:00 P. M., assigned rate $10.92 per day, The position was not assigned to work on Saturday and Sunday, these being unassigned days.
There was only one position of Serial Record Clerk in the operation at Clifton Forge, Virginia, that being the Monday to Friday, 7:00 A. M. to 3:00 P. M. assignment. Mrs. Annie R. Marshall was regularly assigned to this position, the number of which was A-146, and Mrs. Marshall's regularly assigned duties were to maintain the serial record book through a recording therein of information required in connection with the movement of trains and cars through the Clifton Forge terminal.
On Monday, January 15, 1951 the Carrier did, on account of heavy business and the work being behind on the serial record book, work this job
Attention is called at this point to the fact that Rule 35 (b) does not read verbatim of Section 3 (i) of the March 19, 1949, agreement. This is explained by the fact that the employes requested and the carrier agreed to substitute the words "cut-off (furloughed)" for "extra and unassigned." The carrier understood that this was limiting in some measure the extra or unassigned employes who could be used under the rule, but it is plain that this action in no way impaired the basic rights of te carrier under the provisions of the March 19, 1949, agreement.
In conclusion, there are no rules of the current clerical agreement requiring the working of employee on an overtime basis as contended in this claim. Just the opposite is true; the rules themselves show that the parties understood and intended that extra positions or days would be worked as conditions required. The claim in this case seeks to force an unjustifiable economic situation upon the carrier as well as one not contemplated by the collective bargaining rules.
All of the data contained in this submission have been discussed in conference or by correspondence with the employe representatives.
OPINION OF BOARD: This is a companion case to Docket CL-6064 and the principles enunciated in our Award No. 6036 are applicable here,
On the factual question as to whether a new position was properly established or whether the claimant had a preference to overtime work under Rule 35 we note that Carrier's superintendent in rejecting claimant's time ticket said:
Since the extra clerk who performed the work was called under the very rule which gives claimant a preference to the work we think the claim must be sustained.
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