NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

John H. Dorsey, Referee

KANSAS CITY TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY

Joseph P. Vajdic January 2, 1965

F. H. Richardson January 7, 1965

J. L. Watts January 2, 1965

Joseph Palmentere January 2, 1965

B. E. Chambers January 5, 1965

J. U. Condon January 8, 1965

W. L. Behen January 13, 1965

W. H. Vandivort January 13, 1965

J. L. McCurnin January 2, 1965

Donald Harris January 5, 1965

W. E. Rittman January 7, 1965

W. P. Reece January 13, 1965

H. E. Weatherman January 13, 1965

A. B. Wyatt January 13, 1965

"RULE 46.

(a) Paragraph 2. Nothing herein shall be construed to permit the reduction of days for the employes covered by Seniority Classes 1 and 2, Rule 1 below five (5) per week, excepting that this number may be reduced in a week in which holidays occur within the five days constituting the workweek by the number of such holidays.

(e) Holiday force reductions in Mail and Baggage Handler positions, Mail and Baggage Department when made, shall be on a seniority basis on a given tour and the positions will lose their identity on those days; that is, positions may be combined where necessary.

(f) In a situation where the originally posted cut-back of Mail and Baggage Handlers, Mail and Baggage Department, on a given tour on a holiday needs revision because of employes subsequently laying off on the holiday and the Carrier desires to call in additional employes, the senior, available regular assigned employes cut-back on the tour will be called."

On November 20, 1964, an agreement was negotiated on a national basis which covered the instant parties granting to the employes an additional day off with pay on each such employe's birthday. Article II-Holidays, of the November 20, 1964 Agreement, is attached as Exhibit 1.

On each of the dates, January 2, 5, 7, 8 and 13, 1965, as listed in the Statement of Claim, Mail and Baggage Department Employes whose birthdays fell on those dates were laid off in seniority order in accordance with Rule 46(e). Each Claimant, if he qualified under Section 6(c) of the Birthday Holiday Rule, Exhibit 1, received a basic day's birthday holiday pay for that day.

It is petitioner's contention that Claimants should have been permitted to work on the birthday holiday.

(Exhibits not reproduced.)

OPINION OF BOARD: This case involves the same parties, Agreements and presents the same pivotal issue as in Award No. 15598.

Claimants herein were regularly assigned employes, and each of their positions was worked on their respective birthdays.

For reasons stated in Award No. 15598, we will sustain the Claim in the instant case.

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

That the parties waived oral hearing;

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 Carrier violated the Agreement.

AWARD