NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-19487
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
(George P. Baker, Richard C. Bond, Jervis Langdon, Jr.
( and Willard Wirta, Trustees of the Property of
( Penn Central~Transportation Company, Debtor
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Rail
road Signalmen on the former New York Central Railroad
Company (Buffalo and East) that:
(a) Carrier violated the Signalmen's Agreement, particularly Sections 18 (k) and 35, when, on da
(b) Carrier pay to Signal Maintainer C. K. Kiernan additional time
equal to eight (8) hours at his overtime rate for each date -- July 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 28, 29, 30, and 31; and August 1, 1969. Carrier also pay to Signal
Maintainer George Jaccino additional time equal to eight (8) hours at his overtime rate for each dat
14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, 1969, as a consequence of the violation.
OPINION OF BOARD: Carrier's Hudson Division is divided into Sub-Divisions
one of which is the Electric Sub-Division involved in this
dispute. The Electric Sub-Division is further divided, for signal maintenance
purposes, into Sections each having as its employes' headquarters a Signal
Station identified by alphabetical letters (i.e., 28.10, etc.). In addition
there is a gang of Signal Maintainer employes identified as "Section X". The
employes in "Section X" are assigned to cover emergency calls and otherwise
assist the Signal Maintainer employes at the various Signal Station Sections
on the entire Electric Sub-Division.
On the claim dates a Signal Maintainer who was regularly assigned
to "Section X", as a first shift employe, was assigned to work the first shift
on either Section SS-DV or SS-NW at times specified in the Claim when either of
the regular assigned Signalmen at such Signal Station Sections were on vacation.
Regularly assigned Signal Station employes on the second shift of
DV and NW, Claimants herein, filed claim that Carrier violated Sec. 18 and Sec.
35 of the Agreement when it failed to assign them to perform the work on the
first shift, in their respective Section, on the claim dates.
Sec. 18(k) of the Agreement which appears under the caption "Hours of
Service" reads:
I
Awa^d Number 20379 Page 2
Dockat Number SG-19487
"(k) Where work is required by the carrier to be performed
on a day which is not a part of any assignment, it may be
performed by an available unassigned employe who will otherwise not have 40 hours of work that week;
by the regular employe." (Emphasis supplied)
The record reveals no evidence of violation of this Sec. 18(k).
Section 35 of the Agreement reads:
"Sec. 35. Employes shall not be required to suspend work
during regular working hours to absorb overtime." (Emphasis supplied).
There is no showing in this record that either Claimant was required to suspend work during his
stated in our Award 16611, we find that Carrier did not violate Sec. 35.
In its Submission the Organization states:
_"'here is no dispute between the parties evidenced by the
-:cord, that other than regular employes might be used in the
,resent circumstances; the dispute has been in a difference of
positions regarding who are such regular employes. The employes
maintain that in these circumstances it can only be other employes
headquartered at the same Signal Station and our position is supported by several of our exhibits at
FINDINGS: 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 Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are
respectively Carrier and Employer within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over
dispute involved herein; and
i
Award Number 20379 Page 3
Docket Number SG-19487
Carrier did not violate the Agreement.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAIOROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST: ~ i/1/ i
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 6th day of September 1974.