NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
TRANSPORTATION-COMMUNICATION EMPLOYEES
UNION
(Formerly The Order of Railroad Telegraphers)
Carrier violated the terms of the Telegraphers' Agreement when on November 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, 1963, it caused, required or permitted improper relief to H. B. Lewis, station agent, Troutman, North Carolina, and utilized Mr. Lewis to relieve H. L. Jones, agent-telegrapher at Davidson, North Carolina for vacation on the same dates as above listed and without compensating Mr. Lewis in accordance with the Agreement for his work performed away from his regular assignment.
Carrier shall now compensate H. L. Jones, agent-telegrapher, Davidson, North Carolina, at the rate of time and one-half rate of pay in addition to the straight time rate of pay allowed for November 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, 1963 and compensate H. B. Lewis, station agent, Troutman, North Carolina, $5.00 per day for the same dates for his work at Davidson, North Carolina. Total claim for Mr. Jones is $151.60 and total for Mr. Lewis $25.00.
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: The two claims involved in this dispute have a common principle in that the Carrier used employees from one seniority district and required or permitted them to work on other seniority districts on which they had no seniority.
In Claim No. 1, the following named employees are employed on the Danville Division of the Southern Railway Company and hold agent-telegrapher seniority on the Danville Division as follows:
These employees were used to perform relief on various positions on the Winston-Salem Division on various dates shown in the claim.
Claims were made in behalf of W. L. Thames, H. C. Metz, Miss S. L. Hair, Mrs. E. L. Thames, J. B. Coleman, H. K. Alley, and F. E. Bass who were employees who held agent-telegrapher seniority on the Winston-Salem Division and were entitled to assignment to positions on the Winston-Salem Division in preference to the aforementioned employees on the Danville Division.
OPINION OF BOARD: This case involves two claims in which it is alleged that regularly assigned employes in one seniority district were improperly relieved, during temporary absences, by extra employes from an adjoining seniority district.
In Claim No. 1 five regularly assigned agent-telegraphers were so relieved for vacations of five and ten days each. One such agent-telegrapher was so relieved for a total of six days while he was performing service as an extra train dispatcher. Another such agent-telegrapher was so relieved for thirteen days because of illness. Claim was filed on behalf of these absent employes for a day's pay each day they were absent.
In Claim No. 2 a regularly assigned agent-telegrapher was afforded a five-day vacation by diverting another regular employe in the same seniority district who, in turn, was relieved by an extra employe from the adjoining district. The diverted employe was compensated as provided by Rule 15. Claim was filed on behalf of the vacationing employe for five days' pay.
A careful analysis of the record reveals that the Employes have failed to establish any basis for the claims in behalf of the named Claimants.
It is well settled by a host of our awards that the burden of proving all elements of a claim rests with the petitioner. These claims, therefore, must be denied for failure of proof.
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