STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Claimant C. E. Drain was regularly assigned to the position of B&B Foreman of Gang No. 3. Because of illness, the claimant was on leave of absence beginning June 6, 1969.
During the calendar year of 1969, the claimant performed compensated service on a sufficient number of days to qualify for a vacation during the calendar year of 1970.
Effective July 1, 1969, all rates of pay were increased in compliance with the provisions of Article I of the May 17, 1968 National Agreement which insofar as it is pertinent hereto reads:
The Agreement in effect between the two parties to this dispute dated April 1, 1951, together with supplements, amendments and interpretations thereto is by reference made a part of this Statement of Facts-.
CARRIER'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: B&B Foreman C. E. Drain was given a leave of absence on or about June 6, 1969. He remained on leave of absence and performed no subsequent service for this Carrier until after his 1970 vacation period, February 16, 1970 through March 13, 1970.
Claimant Drain was compensated under provisions of Article 7(e) of the Vacation Agreement at the rate of $619.91 per month. The claim here involved is that the claimant should be paid for his 1970 vacation under provisions of Article 7 (a) of the Vacation Agreement at the rate of $638.51 per month.
OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, B&13 Foreman of Gang No. 3, was on leave of absence due to illness from June 6, 1969. Effective July 1, 1969, all rates of pay were increased in accord with Article I of the May 17, 1968 National Agreement. Claimant took his vacation commencing February 16, 1970 to March 13, 1970. Claimant performed no service for Carrier from June 6, 1968 until his return to work for Carrier at the end of his vacation period. Claimant was paid for his vacation at the rate of $619.91 per month, rather than at the rate of $638.52 as the Organization is now contending that he should have been paid.
The Organization's position is that Claimant is entitled to vacation pay computed on the basis of the rate of his position in effect during February, 1970 in accordance with Section (a) of Article 7 of the December 17, 1941 National Agreement, reading as follows:
Carrier's defense to this claim is that Claimant was not the regularly assigned employe to the position in question, and that there cannot be more than one regularly assigned employe to said position; that Claimant is entitled to vacation payments based on the provisions of Article 7 (e) of the said December 17, 1941 National Vacation Agreement, which reads as follows:
This Board was confronted with a similar dispute in Award No. 18255. In said Award No. 18255, this Board concluded: