Award Number 17842 Docket Number TE-17903
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation Communication Employees Union on the Union Pacific Railroad (South Central and Northwestern Districts), that:
The dispute involved herein is predicated on various provisions of the collective bargaining Agreement, effective October 1, 1959, as amended and supplemented, between the Transportation-Communication Employees Union and the Union Pacific Railroad Company (South Central and Northwestern District). The claim was handled on the property in the usual manner up to and including a conference with the highest officer designated by the Carrier to handle such claims, where it was discussed on November 25, 1967.
The dispute arose when the Carrier gave the Claimant the day off on his Birthday-Holiday, April 29, 1967 and compensated him for same, but required a Rule 2 Agent at the same location to copy and handle train orders and clearance cards during the assigned hours that Claimant was scheduled to work. The work of copying, handling and delivering train orders and clearance cards is normally, regularly and customarily performed by the Claimant.
It is the contention of the Employees that certain provisions of the collective bargaining Agreement were violated and that the named Claimant is entitled to the compensation requested. These provisions are set forth in Section (d)-Rules Relied On.
The Carrier conceded that the work of the absent Employee was performed in the manner asserted, but it contends that the Employees did not prove that the work in question was exclusively assigned to the Claimant and the claim is, therefore, without merit.
During the time when Mr. Corak was off duty on the birthday-holiday required by the Agreement, Mr. Armstrong did receive a train order, a photo copy of which is attached (marked Carrier's Exhibit A-1).
The union contends that Mr. Armstrong's copying a train order constituted a violation of the Agreement, that telegrapher-clerk Corak should have been called for this work, and on this basis claims 8 hours pay at the premium time and one-half rate.
Also in evidence as to the handling of the dispute by the parties is the following correspondence:
OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimant was regularly assigned as first telegrapher-clerk at Nyssa, Oregon, on April 29, 1967, which was his birthday. He was given the birthday-holiday off, and allowed holiday pay.
The Petitioner contends that on Claimant's birthday holiday a Rule 2 Agent at the same location was required to copy and handle train orders and clearance cards, during Claimant's assigned hours, and that the work of copying, handling and delivering train orders and clearance cards is normally, regularly and customarily performed by Claimant.
In a long line of Awards this Board has held that work on a holiday comes under the "Work on Unassigned Days" rule (Rule 30(1) of the applicable Agreement) and Decision No. 2 of the Forty-Hour Week Committee, which reads in part:
There does not seem to be any dispute between the parties that the work of copying, handling and delivering train orders at Nyssa during Claimant's regular hours is normally, regularly and customarily handled by Claimant. There likewise seems to be no dispute that on Claimant's birthday-holiday such work was performed by the Rule 2 Agent who did not otherwise normally perform such work. In such circumstances we find the claim to be meritorious. See Awards 17088, 16811, 16666, 16252, 15950, 15911, 12957, among others.
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 dune 21,1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and