STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp.:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Signal Repairman R. Clark has a Signal Repairman's Helper seniority date of 8-6-56, and his rank in that class is 32. Attached hereto as Brotherhood's Exhibit No. 1 is a January 1, 1961, seniority roster which shows that Mr. Clark is junior to all claimants listed in our Statement of Claim.
This dispute arose because the Carrier unilaterally permitted Mr. Clark to select and take his ten (10) day vacation from January 7 to 21, 1962. The claim is based on the contention that the Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, as amended, particularly Rule 51, when it did not cooperate with the Committee in assigning these vacation dates.
The Claim was initiated on February 1, 1962, and was subsequently handled in the usual and proper manner on the property, up to and including the highest officer of the Carrier designated to handle such disputes, without receiving a satisfactory settlement. The pertinent correspondence that constitutes the handling of this dispute on the property is attached hereto as Brotherhood's Exhibit Nos. 2 to8, inclusive.
This dispute involves the Agreement of the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Company with the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (formerly Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America) governing rates of pay and working
conditions of Signal Department Employes, rules revised effective October 2, 1952, rates revised effective March 1, 1951. By reference thereto, that agreement, as amended, is hereby made a part of the record in this dispute.
CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: Hudson Rapid Tubes Corporation formerly operated an interurban electric railway betweeen the states of New York and New Jersey. Effective 12:01 A. M., September 1, 1962, Port Authority Trams-Hudson Corporation, acquired substantially all of the property of Hudson Rapid Tubes Corporation by condemnation, and commenced operating the railroad. The present claim relates to an alleged contract violation occurring prior to the condemnation.
BRS is making a claim on behalf of 20 Signal Repairmen for an additional ten days' vacation pay for the year 1962.
BRS contends that this windfall is owing by reason of the fact that Carrier granted a ten-day vacation (between January 7, 1962 and January 21, 1962) to Signal Repairman R. Clark without consultation with the Organization.
Rule 51 of the applicable agreement between the parties provides that vacations shall be given with due regard being given "to the desires and preferences of the employes in seniority order." It is further provided that the Organization and Carrier "will cooperate in assigning vacation dates."
In accordance with the spirit of these provisions, vacations are normally arranged through a "pick" with due regard being given to seniority.
OPINION OF BOARD: Petitioner's claim for pay herein is primarily based upon an alleged violation of Rule 51 of its Agreement with the Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Company, which Rule provides in pertinent part as follows:
The Rule is clear in providing that the parties "will cooperate in assigning vacation dates" and the parties are bound thereby. The record shows that Carrier assigned Signal Repairman Clark a vacation period in 1962 without consulting the Organization. While this constituted a technical violation of the Rule, it lends no support for the claim for pay on behalf of Claimants who were senior to Clark and the claim for pay is denied.