PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Robert W. Blanchette, Richard C. Bond
 ( and John H. McArthur, Trustees of the
 ( Property of Penn Central Transportation
 ( Company, Debtor

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood
 of Railroad Signalmen on the former New York Central
 Railroad Company-Lines West of Buffalo (now Penn Central Transportation
 Company):


Claim on behalf of D. E. Katz, Signal Maintainer, Homer, Michigan, for five (5) hours punitive rate, account G. W. Gowanlock, Leading Signal Maintainer, Jackson, Michigan, was called and performed work on Mr. Katz's assigned territory on November 19, 1974.

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant did not perform certain work in his
 territory on the claim date. Although Carrier
 asserts that it got no answer when it telephoned the Claimant at home;
 nonetheless, it allowed him five (5) hours at the straight time rate.
 Claimant seeks payment at the punitive rate.

 It appears that the only issue before us is whether or not the punitive rate should have been paid.

 While it is not questioned that Claimant would have received pay at the punitive rate had he performed the work on the claim date, Carrier resists the claim because the agreement provides for such a rate only when the employe performs service - not when work is not performed. Carrier cites certain Awards in support of its position. See, for example, Awards 4616, 6107, 13191, 17745, etc.
the outcome here. There, the Board considered the conflict in prior'
 Awards, and concluded that the "straight time" Awards (which distinguished
 rights to perform work and actual performance) were not sound. Instead,
 it followed the "punitive" rate determinations "...laid down in Award
 13738 ...."
                    Docket Number SG-21569


In argument to this Board, Carrier sought to show what it considered to be the inconsistency in our approach to the entire damage question, but we do not - in this Award - seek to reconsider that entire topic. If the Claimant had been called to work, he would have been compensated at the punitive rate. Under those circumstances, and consistent with Award 19947, we will sustain 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 violated.


                      A W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTIENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of October 1977.


r