(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE :


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

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreem,:nt when it failed to recall f1urloutihed. employe David Hensley to f911 a tem: rorary vacancy as laborer at Roufemere, Michigan January 22, 1979 through F,.-bruary 20, 1979, both dates inclusive (System File C-TC-766/;40-2512).

 (2) Becauce of the aforesaid violation, David Hensley shall be allowed one hundred thirty-six (136) hours of pay at the laborer's straight time rate and sixteen (16) hours of pay at the laborer's time and one-half rate."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant contends that Carrier violated the controlling
 Agreement, particularly Rules 5(c) and 13(a) when it failed to recall him to fill a temporary's laborers vacancy at Rongemere, Michigan and instead called a ,junior employe to perform this work on various dates between January 22, 1979 and February 20, 1979.

 Carrier contends that it complied with the Agreement since the pack Supervisor, who telephoned his house on January 22, 1979 to ascertain his availability for temporary snow removal work was advised 1?y either Claimant's wife or mother th a full time position. It argues that he was properly contacted to perform temporary work, consistent with past notification practices, but Claimant did not want such work.

 In our review of this case, we concur with Claimant's position. Rule 5(c) which relates to the recall of furloughed employes, does not provide a separate recall procedure for temporary work assignments. It requires that when forces are increased, vacancies occur or new positions are created that trackmen in furloughed or cut off status, will be recalled in seniority order and then in accordance with a formalized time structured notification procedure. Furloughed employee will be notified by mail or telegram at their last known address. There is no alternative notification provision for temporary positions. Though it might be convenient, practical and expedient for Carrier to telephone contact furloughed employes for temporary work, Rule 5(c) does not provide for
                    Docket Number MW-23487


this mode of notification. Moreover., it is not validated by thessgr-tign gi' pgst Practice.

 In Third Division Award 23130 (Referee Scearce) vhiqh ve gir4 ccoaceVtqally relevant herein, we stated in pertinent part that:

            "In contrast., the Carrier asserts a longstaadino

        practice of contacting furloughed employees by tele

        phone relative to returning to duty. It is welt e§tab-__

        lished that even where a past practice is proven it

        cannot offset clear and unambiguous language drafted

        by the parties to the contrary. In this Moe, while

        it may have been the Carrier's practice to co ptaot

        furloughed employees by telephone - and obviously it

        is more convenient this does not relieve the (,crier

        or its contractual responsibility to do so for4laliy*

        Such approach as espoused by the Carrier also lesyes

        unanswered the question of the extent of its obligation

        if a furloughed employee has no telephone"


Carrier was obligated to -ecall Claimant in accordance with the Agreement's unambiguous procedures :ind Rule 5(c) does not provide an alternate notification process for temporary work assignments. The AYreemrnt was violated and we will sustain the claim.

    FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upm the whole record ---' and all the evidence., find:. and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the FSnlloyes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes wittIn the meaning of the Railway Labor Acts as approved June 21,, 1934;

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

        That the Agreement was violatedt V-c C EII


                        A W A R D

                              - F'~J 't 10

                                                  ·or^

        Claim sustained.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD AU '~iRILy Order of Thlrd~DivielMrL~I~


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago,, Illinois, this 29th day of January l9If.