NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation-Communication Employees Union on the Southern Pacific Company (Lines in Texas and Louisiana), that:
An Agreement between the parties effective December 1, 1947 as amended and supplemented is available to your Board and by this reference is made a part hereof.
This claim was timely presented, progressed in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, including conference with the highest officer designated by the Carrier to receive appeals and has been declined. The Employees, therefore, appeal to your Honorable Board for adjudication.
Claimant was on vacation when his birthday occurred on one of the regularly assigned work days of his position. The relief employee worked on that day. Compensation at the time and one-half rate was claimed, Carrier denied payment.
Claimant G. Moore, Junior is the regularly assigned Agent-Telegrapher at Midland, Louisiana. His assigned hours are 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., Daily, Monday through Friday, with meal period of one hour between the hours of 11:30 A.M. and 1:30 P.M. He had earned and was granted four weeks
AWARDS OF THIRD DIVISION, NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUST
MENT BOARD
CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: G. Moore, hereinafter called claimant, was assigned as agent-telegrapher at Midland, La., a position under the scope of the agreement with the Transportation-Communication Employees Union, hereinafter referred to as the Union or Petitioner. August 18, 1967, was Moore's birthday. The day would have been one of his regular work days but Moore was on annual vacation August 7 through September 1. Eight pro rata hours vacation pay was allowed Moore for each working day during the vacation period, i.e., August 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31 and September 1. In addition to claim for 8-hours vacation pay for August 18, Moore claimed 8-hours time and one-half for this day. This claim was declined.
District Chairman, TCU, appealed the claim. Superintendent declined the appeal.
December 27, 1967, General Chairman, TCU, appealed to Carrier's Manager of Personnel. This appeal was declined by letter dated January 23, 1968. Conference was held April 25, 1968, at which no settlement was reached.
Carrier is in receipt of the Board's instructions dated October 15, 1968, that submission in the matter be made.
OPINION OF BOARD: On Claimant's 1967 birthday (which fell on a scheduled workday of his regular assignment), he was on vacation and his position was filled by a relief man. Petitioner alleges that had Claimant not been on vacation he would have been entitled to fill his position and would have received a day at the time and one-half rate in addition to a day as holiday pay he should receive the same compensation as vacation allowance. Petitioner cites our Awards 15227, 15722, 16377 and 16472. These awards, along with others, sustained claims where it was found that the Claimant would have been entitled to work his position on his birthday had he not been on vacation.
Carrier attempts to distinguish this case on the theory that the Claimant's position would not have been filled had Claimant not been on his vacation; however, Carrier frankly admits that it cannot cite a single instance when either Claimant's position or any similar position has been blanked on the birthday of the occupant. Furthermore, it was necessary for the relief man to work overtime on Claimant's position on the date involved. Compare Awards 17366, 17367.
On the record before us we believe Petitioner has shown that the position would have been filled and Claimant would have been entitled to