NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-24368
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
_STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the former Texas and Pacific Railway
Company:
On behalf of Signal Maintainer R. P. Patterson for
19
hours at time
and one-half his straight time rate of pay, account of being required to perform
routine maintenance work after his assigned hours November 12, 13,
17, 19,
20, 24,
25, December 4,
9
and 11,
1980,
replacing bootlegs and track connections destroyed
by a rail gang working on his territory." (Carrier file: K 315-210)
OPINION OF BOARD: The claimant, a monthly rated signal maintainer in the
Carrier's Texas District, seeks compensation at overtime
rates for time he was required to spend in the performance of routine signal
maintenance work outside his normal weekday hours.
The central issue is whether, as the Organization contends, Rule
48(b)(5) of the collective bargaining agreement applies to the work performed.
The Organization agrees that the express language of the rule covers
only time worked on days outside of the regular workweek. It maintains, however,
that the rule was intended, and must be interpreted, to cover as well time worked
outside of regular weekday work hours.
The Organization puts forth two bases for its contention: First, it
says, kinds of non-working time have the same purpose, which, in its view, is
to make available to the employes free unassignable time for rest and leisure. In
addition, it asserts, a practice has existed in this territory of paying monthly
rated signalmen for work performed outside of their regular daily working hours
at the same overtime rates as for the sixth day of their workweek.
The Carrier replies that the complainant is entitled no pay whatever
for the work in question. In its opinion, Rule 4$(b)(5) cannot be read to embrace
any time segment other than that expressly described in the words of the rule.
The Board can find no reasonable basis in the record for sustaining the
claim. We are not persuaded that Rule 48(b)(5) can fairly be interpreted to
apply to maintenance work required of monthly rated signalmen outside of their
regular work hours on weekdays.
The language of the rule is plain and unambiguous, and we find no hint
in it or elsewhere in the record of any purpose to treat the time outside of normal
weekday work hours in the same way as the sixcth day of the workweek.
Award Number 24415 Page 2
Docket Number SG-24368
Nor do we find support either in the language of the rule or elsewhere
in the record of the existence of a practice in the Carrier's Texas District of
paying monthly rated signalmen for the time claimed. Any practice that may have
existed previously on the predecessor Texas and Pacific Railroad has not been
shown to apply to the Carrier.
The Board does note that an agreement formulated by the Carrier and
recently accepted by Organization representatives for other former Texas and
Pacific territories of the Carrier provides for payment at straight time for
additional hours required to be worked on a regular workday. That agreement has
apparently not been accepted for the Texas District.
The claim will be denied.
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
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board
~r
BY?='~'.~
-~,--L-rc.~LC..-_
2
,c_
-a-
L
j Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of June
1983.
v y
y G