NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number CL-19825
Benjamin Rubenstein, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Cl.:rks,
( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employee
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Chicago and Illinois Midland Railway Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood, (GL-7151)
that:
i. The Carrier violated the Agre.:ment when it refused :o compensate
Mr. R. R. Brown for eight (8) hours Holiday pay for New Years Day, January 1,
1972.
2. Carrier shall be required to compensate Mr. B_,c,c is the r..nount
of $38.08.
OPINION OF BOARD; Claimant requests holiday pay for New
YE_1''3
Day, Jenuary 1,
1972.
He held the position of Agent-Telegrapher. He also held a position as R:
lief Dispatcher. He was on vacation for the period ending Dec-msber 31, 1971, which
was a Friday. On Saturday, New Year's Day, he worked as dispatcher, and on Monday, January 3, he ret
The Carrier refused holiday pay for agent-telegrapher on the ground
that the contract provides that in order for an employee to receive I·oliday pay
he must be working at his regular job the day before and the day after the holiday. It further conte
holiday pay under the dispatcher's agreement, he may not be paid also pursuant
to the Telegrapher's agreement.
In Award No. 18261, David Dolnick, Referee, the facts were similar
to those involved herein. In that case, the Board, after reviewing and citing
a long string of awards, held that the effect of those decisions is "that the
rule makes no qualification with respect to the source of the compensation
paid by the carrier and credited to the employee's regular work days immediately
preceding and following the holiday."
In Award No. 16457 (Mesigh), we said:
"...it is not unusual for regularly assigned employees
under non-operating agreements to hold dual seniority. We
can read no intent in that language to disqualify a regularly
assigned employee... for holiday pay because he may have worked
under some other agreement either on the day before or the day
after on the holiday."
Award Number 19715 Page 2
Docket Number CL-19825
In the instant case the claimant was on vacation the day before
the holiday and, thus, under the jurisdiction of the carrier and receiving
pay from it. This is tantamount to working for it the day before the holiday. The first working day
at his regularly assigned job.
The claimant, under the circumstances, must be considered as having
worked the day before and the day after the holiday, and entitled to his holiday pay.
FINDINf.S: The Third Division of the Adjust.oeat Board, upon the whole record
and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this dispute are
respectively Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved ,Tune 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein; and
That the Agreement was violated.
A W A R D
Claim sustained.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
600,
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of April 1973.