THE PITTSBURGH & LAKE ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY
THE LAKE ERIE & EASTERN RAILROAD COMPANY
OPINION OF BOARD: As of claim dates Claimants were extra employes filling the positions of regular incumbents who were then absent from their assignments. Three worked on Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1954, as well as on their work-days just before and after said holiday. The same work conditions existed for four claimants in respect to Christmas, 1954; for one in respect to New Year's Day, 1955; for two in respect to Washington's Birthday, 1955; for one in respect to Decoration Day, 1955; and for three Claimants in respect to the Fourth of July, 1955. All received time and onehalf pay for working on these respective holidays.
The issue presented by these claims for pro-rata pay in respect to the above-mentioned holidays is whether Claimants were "regularly assigned" as of claim dates and were thus entitled to said pay under Article II, Section 1, of the August 21, 1954, National Agreement.
Numerous Awards of the Third and Second Divisions have ruled on this issue in cases involving similar circumstances and agreement provisions. The great majority of these Awards have denied the claims therein on the ground that the extra employes who were substituting for the regular incumbents were not "regularly assigned" within the meaning of that phrase as used in the above-mentioned National Agreement.
There are no facts or rules in the instant case that might provide the basis for a contrary ruling. Accordingly, the Board, following particularly the reasoning adopted in Third Division Awards Nos. 7430 and 8498, finds that the instant claims cannot 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