(1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it failed and refused to compensate Mr. M. P. Ferguson at the on-track mower operator's rate of pay for the period beginning May 29 and ending June 26, 1964. (System Case No. 340 MofW.)
(2) The claim as appealed to Superintendent T. J. Casey in appeal letter dated September 23, 1964 should be allowed as presented because Superintendent Casey failed to notify Local Chairman Daigre in writing of any reasons for the Superintendent's disallowance of the claim.
(3) The claim as presented in behalf of Mr. M. P. Ferguson "for the difference between the rate he was paid, $2.273 per hour, and that of on-track mower operator, $2.463 per hour, for a total of twenty (20) days starting May 29th and ending June 26, 1964" be paid because of the violation referred to in Part (1) of this claim and because of the Superintendent's failure to give reasons for disallowance of the claim (Sections (a) and (c) of Rule 26).
Claim is presented' in favor of claimant M. P. Ferguson, Group 4 machine operator, and that the claimant be paid the proper rate for on track mowing machine on the following dates May 29, 1964, June 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26, 1964.
Claim was timely and properly presented and handled by the Employes at all stages of appeal up to and including the Carrier's highest appellate officer.
The Agreement in effect between the two parties to this dispute dated September 1, 1934, together with supplements, amendments and intepretations thereto is by reference made a part of this Statement of Facts.
On June 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 15 and 16, 1964 the claimant, M. P. Ferguson, a section laborer, Mississippi Division, was utilized to operate a motor car towing an on-track mowing machine. He was compensated for the service performed at the rate of $2.273 per hour.
The union contends that the claimant was entitled to the higher rate of "head operator" of an on-track mowing machine for all the days beginning May 29, and ending June 26, 1964. In addition, they allege the company failed to give reasons for the disallowance of the claim on appeal to the superintendent and it therefore should be allowed as presented.
CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: Claimant M. P. Ferguson holds seniority as a section laborer in Gang 21, Mississippi Division, with a seniority date of February 1, 1956. On ten days, June 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 15 and 16, 1964, the company assigned him to operate a motor car towing an on-track mowing machine under the supervision and direction of a section foreman. The claimant had not filed the proper application for operating the motor car, as required under the provisions of Rule 21(c) of the effective agreement; however, he was compensated for service performed at the rate applicable to motor car operator.
The union states that the claim period was from May 29, 1964 through June 26, 1964, excluding rest days. The company however, took exception to the dates claimed on the basis the machine was not operated on his seniority district subsequent to June 16, 1964.
The agreement in effect between the parties to this dispute dated June 1, 1962, is by reference made a part of this statement of fact.
OPINION OF BOARD: The only issue before the Board in this case is whether or not 'Carrier properly denied the claim under the provisions of Article V of the August 21, 1954 Agreement. Article V has been incorporated into the effective Agreement as Rule 26. Rule 26 reads in part as follows:
The issue of proper denial arose when Superintendent Casey denied the claim with the following quote from his letter of September 30, 1964.
"There is clearly a difference of opinion in the interpretation of working agreement in this instance. It would be my suggestion that this case be forwarded to the General Chairman for further handling. I do not think it can be adjusted locally.