(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
 Railroad Signalmen on the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company that:

 Carrier pay to Signal Maintainer W. F. Berneking 8 hours' overtime which he worked May 27, 1972, the regular assigned Signal maintainer with repairs to switch No.. 68 lua.aLed in Silvia Hump Yard.

 OPINION .OF BOARD: Claimant was called to work on the sixth day of his
 work week which is a day on which he is not regularly scheduled for work.

 The Claimant's position is that the work involved was ordinary maintenance and construction work while the Carrier maintains that the work was emergent in nature. If the work is ordinary maintenance and construction work the Claimant is entitled to be compensated at the puta tive rate as claimed. The applicable rule is rule 62 which in pertinent part reads as follows:

 Rule 62 - 3rd paragraph - "No overtime is allowed for time worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day on the regularly assigned five (5) days per week the employee is scheduled to work, nor on the first scheduled rest day (6th day) of the work week or holidays; on the other hand, no time is to be deducted unless the employee lays off on his own accord."

 Rule 62 - 6th paragraph - "Such monthly rated employees will not be required to perform ordinary maintanance or construction on the sixth day of the work week nor on recognized holidays. Fur such service rules applicable to other employees of 17 and 18. Only emergency service may be required on such sixth day, which will be the service necessary to restore the signal system to safe working order."

 The Claimant maintains that because the derailment only put 3 of the Carrier's 49 tracks out of service an emergency condition did not exist. The Carrier maintains that the effect of having tracks 6, 7 and 8 out of service was crippling to the Carrier's operations.


We note that the final sentence of paragraph 6 states, "Only emergency service may be required on such sixth day, which will be the service necessary to restore the signal system to safe working order."

 There is no question but that there was a derailment. There is no question but that the derailment caused the necessity of the performance of the signal work in switch machine. There is further no question but that the Carrier's signal system would not be resto switch machine was repaired or replaced.

 We hold that under the conditions present herein an emergency existed as contemplated by rule 62 such as would permit the Carrier to call Claimant on his 6th day without being liable to compensate him at the punitive rate.



That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and






                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: 144 e.'~_uci-~e Secia~ary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 18th day of July 1975.