PARTIES TO DISPUTE:



(1) The Agreement was violated when Track Sub-department employes instead of Bridge and Building Sub-department employes were used to remove spilled gravel from the deck and from the control rods of Drawbridge 0-59 at Longview Junction on December 14, 1974 (System File P-P-216C/ MW-84 3/10/75).

 (2) Bridge and Building Sub-department Employes 0. Carter, A. E. Rogerson, C. V. Newsted, R. L. Anderson, J. F. Wileman and B. A. Andrews each be allowed six (6) hours of pay at their respective time and onehalf rates because of the afore
OPINION OF BOARD: During the early morning hours of December 14, 1974,
 gravel was accidentally spilled on a draw bridge as a
 train was passing over it. Upon notification "by the bridge tender, the
 Chief Dispatcher called the on-duty section crew to remove the spilled
 gravel. It is the allegation of the Organization that the work that was
 performed was the work of the employes of the Bridge and Building Depart
 ment, the claimants, rather than Track 'Department employes, the employes
 who did the work. To support its claim, the Organization refers to rules
 relating to the separation of sub-departments Seniority, Classification
 of Work and Work on Unassigned Day Rules.

 A priori to the consideration of the rules involved is the contention by the carrier that an emergency existed which precipitated the use of the Track Department employes who were available at the time. The bridge in question was a draw bridge which needed to be raised in the event that river traffic approached it.

 In their ex parte submission, the Employes challenge the Carrier's contention that an emergency existed; however, the Carrier states that no such challenge was made on the property. This Board notes that a brief statement was made on the property by the Organization: "An emergency did not exist in that the work was completed on the following Monday."
                    Docket Number MW-21614


The Organization itself in a letter of March 10, 1975, from the General Chairman to the V.P., Labor Relations of the Carrier states: "Bridge 0-59 is a drawspan and must be maintained in a manner to permit opening for river traffic at all times." This Board interprets the statement of the General Chairman an emergency situation. The cursory denial of an emergency given the statement by the General Chairman does not constitute a reversal of the validity of Carrier's judgment that an emergency existed. Consequently, the statement of the Carrier on the property that an emergency existed must be considered as fact by this Board. Award 20083 relates directly to this issue. Furthermore, numerous Awards of this Board have held that in an emergency situation the Carrier has greater latitude in assigning work. (See Award 9391+, 14372.) We are satisfied that the Carrier acted in good faith to meet an emergency and, solely on that basis, deny the claim.

        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 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

        That the Agreement was not.violated.


                    A W A R D


      The Claim is denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJLB TMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~~ ~~/e-~
          Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of August 1977.