STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad Company:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Leading Signal Repairman R. Warwinsky and Signal Repairmen R. Clark and C. Hines were assigned to headquarters at Hudson Terminal. Signal Repairman G. S. Cone, the Claimnat in this dispute, was assigned to a headquarters at 33rd Street.
The regular tour of duty of the above-listed employes was from 12:00 Midnight until 8:00 A. M. with a work week of Monday through Friday. Although the above-listed employes are assigned to different headquarter points, they are subject to daily assignment by the Signal Foreman and on occasion are assigned to work together.
On Friday, February 19, 1960, Leading Signal Repairman Warwinsky, Signal Repairmen Clark, Hines, and Cone, and other Signalmen were working during their regular tour of duty (12:00 Midnight to 8:00 A. M.) in the area of Caissons 1, 2 and 3.
Due to flooding conditions in Caissons 1, 2 and 3 it was necessary that the Carrier assign some of the employes to work overtime beyond the end of their regular tour of duty. Signal Repairman Cone was the senior of the employes listed above but was not permitted to work the required overtime. Instead, the Carrier arbitrarily assigned three junior employes, Leading Signal Repairman Warwinsky and Signal Repairmen Clark and Hines, to perform the overtime work which consumed 8 hours.
Signal Repairman Cone, being the senior employe of those available, filed a claim for eight (8) hours at the time and one-half rate account his being denied the right, on the basis of his seniority, to work the overtime in preference to the junior employes.
The Organization has demanded that claimant be compensated at the time and one-half rate. Although the claim is without merit, and claimant should receive no compensation, it should be noted that under no condition is a claimant entitled to penalty pay for work which he has not performed. See Third Division Awards 6586, 6664, 6702 and 7242.
Carrier submits that the employe's claim is without merit and should be denied.
OPINION OF BOARD: For the reasons stated in Docket SG-12382, we hold that the Agreement was not violated.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, 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