(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks,
( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes
PARTIES TO DISPITTE:
(St. Louis San Francisco Railway Company



(1) Carrier violated the Agreements between the parties when it arbitrarily and without cause deducted one day's pay from the earnings of Diesel Clerk Van H. Elting in his first half August, 1970 paycheck in violation of the Sick Leave Ag
(2) Carrier ..hall be required to reimburse Mr. Elting the amount illegally deducted, ;27.1737, covering one day's sick pay on January 31, 1970.

OPINION OF FOARD: Cl;~imant's regular assignment is that of Diesel Clerk with
a work week of Monday through Friday, with rest days of
Saturday and Sunday_ Prior to July 29, 196,8 Claimant': Saturday rest day was
incorporated into .-i rcl;cf assignment; on that date Claimant was instructed to
work Saturdays iintiI iurthor advised. IIc continued to work Saturdays regularly
until July 3, 1')70, ::_~-;c f i.vc months after the S, titrd;ry for. which he claimed
sick pay: J.anu;iry 31., 1973.


The record in chi; case is replete with allusions to other dockets pending or decidod by cl,iv Division involving the same Claimant, which allegedly have a bearing on thi.·: matter. We find that the peripheral issues raised by both parties are not relevant to the central. issue which is: should Claimant be allowed sick pay for Saturday, January 31, 1970?

Note 2 of the Sick Leave Agreement between the parties dated December 1, 1969 provides:



The laneuage of Mote 2 is clear and unambiguous; a literal reading of this note would clearly establish that Claimant is entitled to sick leave payment for Saturday, Janu his "eight hour assigr-tint" on that date.

                Docket Number CL-19654


        FIM)IMS: 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 Carri^r and the Erployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier anti L:raloyes within the caring of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 19;1';

Thet this Diviziuil of the Adjus~t:rat Dcard has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was violated.


                      A 1·.' A R ')


        Claim sustained.


                  i I',~' (':' _ c.'~:~.:Oi~=.-.iol


A2'~ST:~

:,`a',.ed at Chic::-o, I11?i:oi.^, ;:his 14th da.y aC February 1973.