NATIONAL RAIE20AD ADJOSTHM BOARD

              Avard Number 22294

              Twnm DIVISICU Docket Number mw-22069


                James F. Scearce, Referee


                Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes

              PARTIES TO DISPUTE (Terminal? Railroad Association of St. Louis

                            STATEN= of CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:


              (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when, an November 29 and 30, 1975.9 it used R. Gray to operate the machine assigned by bulletin to Machine Operator R. Gartner (System File USA 1975-29/013293-13).

                             (2) Macbine Operator R. Gartner be allowed sixteen (16) hours of pair at his time and one-halt rate because of the violation referred to in Part (1) hereof."

               OFINICK C' BOARD: At issue is the operation of a certain piece of
               machinery by a person other than the Claimant an
               days other than those regularly scheduled. The Organization contends
               the Claimant vas bulletined to and did operate a "Speed Swing" machine
               on his regular days -- Monday through Friday. There came a need to
               operate such equipment on November 29 and 30, 1975 -- a Saturday and
               Sunday. (Operation was to help clear coal spillage caused by a
               derailment). The Carrier used another m.a,in. aperator,, senior in
               service to the Claimant, to operate such equipment. The Organization's
               principle contention an the property was that the person used to
               operate such machine use a supervisor. The record would indicate that,
               notvithatandiag a series of assertions by the Organization an the
               property, no proof an its part vas ever adduced to support such a

               Of relevance here is the proper application and interpretation of Role 31 (f) and (g):

                        "(f) 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 extra or unassigned employe who will otherwise not have forty hours of work that week; in all other cases by the regular employe.

                              Award Number 22294 Page

                              Docket number W-22069


                      "(g) Overtime work required following sad continuing with the regular eight (8) hour work period shall be performed by the necessary senior employes working as the sob.


                      Senior available employes will be given preference in performing overtime work on call. basis within the jurisdiction of their respective seniority groups (gang involved in Track Sub-Department). This not to interfere with work on unassigned days covered by Paragraph (f) of this Rule."


              What is key is the matter of the "regular employee" as stated in Hale 31 (f). The Organization contends that the Claimant is bulletined to and regularly operates the "Speed Swing" marhinn used in the work in question:; the Carrier points to the Bulletin announcing the position and to the Award of the position which in both cases, was that of "Machine Operator." Notwithstanding assertions by the Organization that the question of whether or not the Claimant was balletined specifica11y to the "Speed Swing" was not raised on the property, correspondence between the parties on the property support the fact that the Claimant was identified as a "machine operator" by the Organization as well as the other employe. Carrier correspondente is that regard also identif "large machine operator's pay." In point of fact, the Organization's emphasis an the pity was the unsubstantiated claim that the employee to whom such work was assigned was a supervisor. Nothing in the record now substantiates the contention that the Claimant was specifically bulletined to operate the "Speed Swing" machine to the exclusion of others. It thus cannot be said that he was the regular employe an such equipment within the meaning of Rae 31 (f) of the Agreement.

                    FI1~R.3: Th¢ Third Division of the Ad1astmmt Hoard, upon the whose record and alt 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 Acts as approved June 21, 1934;
                              Award Number 22294 Page 3

                              Docket N=ber I3f-22069


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

                    Thst the Agreement was not violated.


                                A W A R D


                    Claim is denied.


                                  NATIaffAL RAQatOAD ADJUSTNUT HOARD

                                  By Order of Third Division


              ATTEST:

                      C4ti9e Secretary


              Dated at Chicago. Illinois, this 31st day of January 1979.