"Section 2-b: Extra employes when used to relieve other employes shall be paid the rates applicable to the positions on which relief service is performed, except that when used on printer clerks' positions the rate paid the extra employe will be governed by the provisions of Section 8, Article II of this Agreement."

it is not apparent to the Carrier what possible application the above quoted rule can have in the circumstances presented in the instant dispute, and the Employes' representatives did not, in their handling of the eight individual claims on the property, explain wy they cited it. That rule, it will be seen, merely prescribes the rates of pay that are to be allowed extra employes when used to relieve other employes. Certainly there is nothing contained therein which serves to change the status of an extra employe to that of a regularly assigned employe for the purpose of applying the holiday provisions of Article II, Sections 1 and 3, of the National Agreement.

The claimants were either "regularly assigned" employes or they were extra employes under the rules of the Agreements. They could not be both. In other words, they obtained the temporary vacancies described in the Carrier's Statement of Facts and continued thereon throughout the duration thereof as extra employes under the terms of the Telegraphers' Agreement, and obviously could not simultaneously be "regularly assigned" employes for the purpose of obtaining holiday pay under the terms of the National Agreement.

In conclusion, the Carrier reiterates that the Employes' claim in the instant dispute is not only wholly without schedule support or merit, but it is furthermore a clear attempt to obtain by an award of the National Railroad Adjustment Board a payment which the Emergency Board rejected. The claim should be denied in its entirety.

All that is contained herein is either known or available to the Employes or their representatives.

(Exhibits not reproduced)

OPINION OF BOARD: This case involves claims on behalf of six named Claimants for holiday pay for certain enumerated holidays. These Claimants were all extra employes, each of whom, under varying circumstances, filled temporary vacancies on regularly assigned positions during the respective periods during which the named holidays occurred.

The essential issue here is whether these Claimants were, during the respective periods involved, "regularly assigned" employes within the meaning of that term as used in Article II, Section 1 of the National Agreement of August 21 1954. Therefore, for all essential purposes, this is the same issue as that decided in Award 8053.

As in that Award, Third Division Awards 7430, 7431 7432 7978 7979 7980 and 7982 are controlling. See also Second Division Awards 2052, 2169 and 2297, among others.

In the instant case, as in the cited Awards, Claimants were not regularly assigned employes as required by Article II, Section 1 of the cited National Agreement. Hence they did not meet the conditions which would entitle them to holiday pay.

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and uon 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 the Agreement was not violated.

AWARD