higher rate is paid for all of the work which has to be performed, so that 5 hours 20 minutes at the Stenographer-Clerk time and one-half rate is paid.

The Employes in other instances have argued that Rule 35 (b) is properly a part of the allocation of overtime rule, being intended to provide that when cut-off (furloughed) employes are available to work at straight time on the unassigned day, they may be used in lieu of the regular employe who has already worked his five work days in that work week and who would have to be paid overtime.

Stated in other language, if there is a cut-off employe who has worked only three days (to illustrate) when the Saturday or Sunday comes on which the work necessary, the Carrier may use that employe at straight time, instead of using the regular employe at time and one-half.

However, that phase of the situation is not involved in the instant case, because there was no cut-off employe available to work at straight time, and the work had to be performed by a regular employe, so that question can only relate to what regular employe will be used. As the Carrier has already stated, the answer is not hidden or in any manner cloudy as to intention of the parties, because the last sentence of the rule stands forth to say plainly:

In working regular employes hereunder, it is understoGd(that where a small amount of work is required on each of two or more positions and only one employe is required, the employe regularly assigned to the majority of the work to be performed will be used."

The Employes in their handling on the property have not contended that the work to be performed on such unassigned days does not fit the "small amount of work" feature of the rule. Therefore, as already shown, there can be no question about which work is in the majority, and the Carrier is not clear as to on what basis the Employes contend the rule has not been met, because in none of their correspondence on the case have such particulars been set forth as to where they derive the separate group theory. The Employes will undoubtedly state their basis of claim in this respect in their ex parte submission, and the Carrier can then make appropriate answer in connection therewith in its rebuttal brief.

As repeatedly shown, however, the handling fully meets all of the provisions of the rules applicable, and the claim should be denied in its entirety.

All data contained in this submission have been discussed in conference of by correspondence with the Employe representatives.

(Exhibits not reproduced.)

OPINION OF BOARD: The Carrier has required Steno-Clerk Dunnigan to perform on Saturday and Sunday, some of the messenger and related work which Claimant Stewart performed on his regular work days, Monday through Friday, which is Group 2, unassigned work of Stewart's position B-1 (14). On the two unassigned days Saturday and Sunday, Dunnigan is also required to perform some of the work of his Group 1 position. Dunnigan consumes about 31% of his time on Saturday and Sunday performing Claim-

ant's work. Claimant does not hold Group 1 seniority nor does Dunnigan hold Group 2 seniority.

The Carrier relies on Rule 35 (a) and (b) which reads as follows:

"(a) Except where it is otherwise agreed between the proper officer and Division Chairman or Local Chairman authorized to act in his stead, in working overtime before or after assigned hours, employes regularly assigned to class of work for which overtime is necessary shall be given preference; the same principle shall apply in working extra time on holidays; the same principle shall also apply in working extra time on unassigned days except as provided in Section (b) of this rule.

"(b) Work on Unassigned Days. Where work is required by the Carrier to be performed on a day which is not a part of any assignment, it may be performed by an available 'cut off' (furloughed) employe who will otherwise not have 40 hours of work that week; in all other cases by the regular employe. In working regular employes hereunder; it is understood that where a small amount of work is required on each of two or more positions and only one employe is required, the employe regularly assigned to the majority of the work to be performed will be used."

Rule 35 (a) states ". . . employes regularly assigned to class of work for which overtime is necessary shall be given preference . . .' . The claimant is the regularly assigned employe to the class of work outlined in this claim.

Rule 35 (b) states that when "work is . . to be performed on a day which is not a part of any assignment, it may be performed by an available 'cut-off' (furloughed) employe who will otherwise not have 40 hours of work that week; in all other cases by the regular employe". Dunnigan was not a cut-off (furloughed) employe but was an assigned Group 1 employe. The last sentence of 35 (b) relates to employes in the same class due to the fact that 35 (a) refers to employes in a class.

The Carrier violated the Seniority rights of this Claimant when it assigned a regular Group 1 employe to perform claimant's Group 2 work on unassigned days. This claim was filed on June 24, 1952 and will be sustained, for a minimum call, from that date on for each Saturday and Sunday that a Group 1 employe performs Group 2 work.

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

That the Carrier violated the Agreement.

AWARD