(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and ( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, ( Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The Texas and Pacific Railway Company

1. Carrier violated the Clerks' Rules Agreement, which became effective March 1, 1973, when it required Clerk, Mr. Floyd Thompson, to work position of Material Clerk No. 104, Fort Worth, Texas, June 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22, 1973, and then refused to properly compensate him pursuant to Rule 21 (a) of the Clerks' Rules Agreement. (Carrier's File 304-348)
2. Carrier shall now be required to compensate Mr. Floyd Thompson for an additional five and one-half hours at the rate of time and one-half for work performed on each of the aforementioned dates.

 OPINION OF BOARD: On the claim dates Material Handler T. Roberts was
 on his scheduled vacation. The scheduled hours of
 his position were 5:00 AM to 1:30 PM, Monday through Friday. Claimant
 Floyd Thompson was regularly assigned to the position of the General
 Material Foreman at the same location (Fort Worth, Texas) Monday through
 Friday, with regularly assigned boars of 7:30 AM to 4:00 PM. On the
 claim dates Mr. Thompson was required to report to work at 5:00 AM -
 two and one-half hours prior to his regularly assigned starting time -
 in order to perform work normally performed by the vacationing Mr.
 Roberts. For this additional work Mr. Thompson was compensated at time
 and one-half his regular rate as General Material Foreman. The claim
 is that Mr. Thompson is entitled to eight hours pay at time and one-half,
 instead of two sad one-half hours pay at the same overtime rate, under
 the Basic Day Rule of the parties' Schedule Agreement. This Rule 21(x)
 provides:



Since Claimant Thompson worked his regular shift each day of the claim in addition to two and one-half hours before the commencement of his shift, Carrier applied Rule 25(a) of the Agreement, which states in pertinent part:

        " ....time in excess of eight (8) hours, exclusive of the meal period, on any day will be considered overtime and paid on the minute basis at the rate of and one-half."


Carrier states that claimant was paid the overtime rate of his regular assignment for service performed in advance of but continuous with his assigned starting time as provided in Article 10(b) of the Vacation Agreement, which reads:

        "Where work of vacationing employes is distributed among two or more employes, such employes will be paid their own respective rates."


Thus we are confronted with the question as to whether claimant was entitled to eight hours' pay at time and one-half rate or the time he actually worked on overtime--namely two and one-half hours per day.

 This is not a case in which another employe claims he or she should have been used instead of the General Material Foreman. Also this is not a case in which the employe who is used could have been available for all the vacationing employe's assigned hours of work. We have seen that after the first two and one-half hours on the claim dates, the substituting employe commenced his regular duties.

 We think claimant was properly compensated for the period of time he worked on the position of the vacationing employe.

        FnIDIRGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Hoard, 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 Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Hoard has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and
                    Award Number 21471 Page 3

                    Docket Number CL-21061


        That the Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJOSTMEEIT HOARD

                          BY Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of March 1977.