NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
THE ORDER OF RAILROAD TELEGRAPHERS
SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (Pacific Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of The
Order of Railroad Telegraphers on the Southern Pacific (Pacific Lines) that:
A. Carrier violated the provisions of the Agreement between the parties
hereto when it failed and refused to properly compensate the employes listed
in paragraph B-(1) to (8), inclusive, of this claim.
B. Carrier shall now pay each of the following employes on the dates
listed for eight (8) hours, at the pro rata hourly rate of pay applicable at
the stations named, in addition to any other compensation previously paid
for such service on these dates:
(1) V. Wimer, Printer Machine Operator-clerk, Bakersfield,
California, Labor Day, September 6 and Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1954.
(2) E. Ray, Agent, Armona, California, Labor Day, September
6 and Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1954.
(3) H. J. Rooney, Agent, Valley Springs, California, Labor Day,
September 6 and Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1954.
(4) J. T. Oakes, Agent, Clovis, California, Labor Day, September 6, 1954.
(5) J. E. Fruin, Agent, Lemoore, California, Thanksgiving Day,
November 25, 1954.
(6) D. K. Williams, Telegrapher-clerk, Chowchilla, California,
Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1954.
(7) C. Corzine, Agent-Telegrapher, Kerman, California, Christmas Day, December 25, 1954.
(8) M. G. Anderson, Telegrapher-clerk, Madera, California,
Christmas Day, December 25, 1954.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS:
There is in evidence an agreement between the Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines), hereinafter
[5417
7981-11
551
shall be paid for at the overtime rate when the entire number of hours
constituting the regular week day assignment are assigned and
worked.
"Section (b). When not assigned to work the hours of the
regular week day assignment or when notified or called to work on
the above specified holidays a less number of hours than constitutes
a day's work within the limits of the regular week day assignment,
employes shall be paid a minimum allowance of three (3) hours at
the overtime rate for three (3) hours' work or less and at the overtime rate for all time worked after the third hour of each tour of duty.
"Section (c). Time worked before or after the limits of the
regular week day assignment shall be paid for in accordance with the
overtime provisions of Rule 14 or the call provisions of Rule 16.
"Section (d). No obligation exists to use any employe nor to
compensate any employee not used on any of the holidays specified in
Section (a) of this rule; provided, however, that if the position of a
regular assigned employe is worked on any of such holidays, such
regular assigned employe shall, if available, be used to perform such
work."
The provisions of Rule 6 were complied with, and it is clearly apparent
from the very language of the rule that it does not support the instant claim.
CONCLUSION
The carrier asserts that it has conclusively established the claim is without basis under the provisions of Section 1, Article II, of agreement dated
August 21, 1954, and it is requested that said claim be denied.
All data herein submitted have been presented to the duly authorized
representative of the employes and are made a part of the particular question
in dispute.
(Exhibits not reproduced.)
OPINION OF BOARD:
Two categories of employes are involved in this
case. The employes named in Claims B(1) through B(6) are extra employes.
The employes named in Claims B(7) and B(8) are regularly assigned
employes.
As to the extra employes the case involves the same "holiday" Agreement
that was involved in Third Division Award 7977, and Rule 4, Section (b) of
the Parties' Collective Agreement in the present case produces the same effect
as that produced by the Rule 21 provision that was applied by this Board in
said Award 7977. For the reasons stated in that Award the claims of the
extra employes named in Claims B(1) through B(5), all of whom were filling
the positions of absent regularly assigned employes during the periods of
their claims and had compensation credited to the days immediately preceding
and following the holidays, must be sustained. The claim of D. K. Williams
in Claim B(6), who was not filling the position of any regularly assigned
employe, must be denied.
The claims of the regularly assigned employes named in Claims B(7) and
B(8) herein are without merit.
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the
whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties to this dispute waived oral hearing thereon;
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;
7981-12
552
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and
That the Carrier violated the Agreement as to the employes named in
Claims B(1) through B(5) inclusive, but did not violate the Agreement as to
the employes named in Claims B(6), B(7) and B(8).
AWARD
Claims of employes named in Claims B(1) through B(5) inclusive are
sustained. Claims of employes named in Claims B(6), B(7) and B(8) are
denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of THIRD DIVISION
ATTEST: A. Ivan Tummon
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 2nd day of July, 1957.