STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On December 8, 1953, Section Laborers E. H. Smathers, P. E. Kennemer, Leonard Coffman, R. G. Martinez and P. E. Crawford performed service in assisting Electricians in digging, back-filling and settim;, High Light Poles. Claimant Era ployes each performed five and one-half (5'~i) hours service in assisting the h;lectricians on December 8,1953.
On 'December 9, 1953, Section Laborers E. H. Smathers, P. E. Kennemer and Leonard Coffman performed service in assisting the Electricians in digging, back-filling and setting High Light Poles to the extent of two (2) hours each.
It is the contention of the Employes that such service was subject to the provisions of Article 15 Rule 1 of the effective Agreement. Therefore, such service should have been compensated for at the Electrician Helper's rate of pay. However, for the service rendered, Claimant Section Laborers were compensated at Section Laborer's rate of pay.
OPINION OF BOARD: The basic facts in this case are identical, with but one exception, to those in Docket MW-7637, this day decided by ward 8089 of this Division.
The exception is with respect to part 2 of the instant claim, reading in part:
The parties are in agreement that the work here in question performed December 9, 1953 required two hours; it is quite obvious that 2 hours of work could not be said to be "preponderating for the day." Otherwise the parties to the dispute, their contentions and the rule at issue are the same as in Docket MW-7637, this day decided by Award 8089, and said Award now is held to be controlling in this docket.
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