THIRD DIVISION

(Supplemental)




PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES

DULUTH, MISSABE AND IRON RANGE

RAILWAY COMPANY


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:






EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Prior to December 19, 1959 Elmer Salo was assigned to a work week of Wednesday through Sunday, with Mondays and Tuesdays as his designated rest days.


However, he was required to suspend work on Saturday, December 19th and Sunday, December 20th, 1959, the last two work days of his Wednesday through Sunday assignment, thereby causing him to suffer the loss of two days' pay.


Consequently, claim as set forth herein was timely presented and progressed in the usual and customary manner on the property, but was declined at all the stages of the appeals procedure.


The Agreement in effect between the two parties to this dispute dated June 1, 1953, together with supplements, amendments, and interpretations thereto is by reference made a part of this Statement of Facts.







13016-9 804

employes working on Saturday or Sunday. Therefore, claimant of necessity, had to wait to resume work on the following Monday.



The Carrier respectfully requests that your Honorable Board sustain the position of the Carrier and deny the claim of the Employes as it has been clearly shown in the foregoing that there is no substance to the claim of the employes in this docket.



OPINION OF BOARD: Section Laborer Elmer Salo was assigned to a work week of five (5) days; Wednesday through Sunday. He was laid off at close of work on Friday. He received compensation for three days of his assigned work week. Claim is made for the fourth and fifth days.














Rule 14 of the Agreement between the Parties to this dispute, effective September 16, 1942 (as amended) at that time provided:

13016-10 85:1


By letter dated July 18, 1952 (accepted in writing by the General Chairman) Carrier's Director of Personnel confirmed an Agreement between the Parties as follows:




This will answer your letter of May 31 and confirm our understanding reached in conference on June 9 relative to your protest regarding the application of Rule 14 and the past practice of reducing Maintenance of Way forces prior to the end of the work week.


Mr. Pattersen, Vice President and General Manager, stated that he concurred with your position and that in the future the Company would be governed by the decision in Award 3757 rendered by the Third Division of the National Railroad Adjustment Board and make force reductions only at the conclusion of the work week, and that this would apply to all employes covered by the scope of the Maintenance of Way Agreement."


On June 1, 1953, the Parties re-adopted without change the portion of Rule 14 quoted above, and numbered it Rule 13 (b).


On the foregoing facts, Rule 13 (b) must be given the same interpretation attributed to it by the Parties' Agreement evidenced by letter of July 18, 1952. Under that interpretation, force reductions may be made "only at the conclusion of the work week."


For the above reasons we find Claimant was improperly laid off and is therefore entitled to claimed compensation.


    The claim is therefore 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


    That the Agreement was violated.


AWARD Claim sustained.

              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of THIRD DIVISION


              ATTEST: S. H. Scbulty

              Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 27th day of October 1964.