NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSqMENT BOARD
'PH'fftD DTVI2TON

 Jooeph A. "fcklea, Iteferne

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

Award Number ^34`01
 Docket Number MW-23382

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The carrier violated the Agreement when, without a conference having been held between the Assistant Vice President, Engineering and Maintenance of Way and the Ge work of the Maintenance of Way and Structures Department, in the vicinity of Boston and Thomasville, Georgia, to outside forces on September 27, October 9, 10, 11, 12 and 17, 1978 (System File 37-SCL-77-6312-2(79-6) J1).

 (2) Because of the violation referred to above, each member assigned to Section Force #6018 at Thomasville, Georgia, who holds seniority in the Track Subdepartment, Group A, Atlanta-Waycross Division Seniority District (as listed below) be paid an equal proportionate share at the applicable Class III Machine and an equal proportionate share at the applicable Trackman's rate of pay for forty-eight (48) hours, for a total of ninety-six (96) man hours consumed by the Contractor in p


William Bruce Johnnie Lovejoy F. McCrary, Sr. L. W. Harris

 I3· #135387 Foreman
 Id. #138484 Trackman
 Id. #164337 Trackman
 id. #159667 Trackman"

 OPINION. Carrier leased a rubber-tired back hoe front end loader
 r_ I
 on certain dates because all of its equipment of this
 type was inwlv in other projects. The losing Company insisted that its
 employs vD*ate a equipment. In addition a laborer, in the employ of the

 leasing compa~,; ssisted the operator in performing paving work,
identical to the claim decided in Award 22917 except for the claim for pry
 for the laborer, who according to Carrier, performed no track work.

 We feel that Award 22917 clearly controls this case and dictates a sustaining Award. We do note, however - as did the author of Award 22917 - that a higher compensation had been made to a Carrier employe as an Operator and thus, no,ePurther payment is required in that regard. No such payments were made, however, concerning the laborer. We are not able to accept the distinctions and contentions advanced by Carrier concerning his conceded use, and thus we do direct payment of the claim se it involves the laborer.






That the Carrier and the @nployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June Pl, 1934;

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



        Claim sustained in accordance with the opinion.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


      4Z &40X

ATTEST:
      Execut ve cretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this fth day of January 1982.
                                          EECEI VED


                                            N 2 5 1982


                                          °ao C!

                                            Ice .8

                                            !.


                                        i