Eckehard Muessig, Referee


              (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes


PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
              (Seaboard System Railroad


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

 1. The Agreement was violated when the members of Section Force 5905 were not called to perform overtime service on their assigned section territory on November 11, 1982 Force 5904 (System File C-4(36)-SF5905/12-30(83-31) G2).

 2. Because of the aforesaid violation each member of Section Force 5905 assigned to that force on November 11, 1982 shall be allowed five (5) hours of pay at their respective time and one-half rates."

 OPINION OF BOARD: This Claim came about after Section Force 5904 requested
 permission to work the November 11, 1982, holiday and then
 be allowed to take off Friday, November 12, 1982. This request was granted.
 However, on November 12, Section Force 5904 reported for work. Its Section
 Foreman contended that there had been a misunderstanding and, in fact, the
 Gang wanted to substitute the Friday after Thanksgiving for working on Nov
 ember 11, 1982. The Carrier's Roadmaster granted the request and agreed that
 the Gang could take off the Friday after Thanksgiving. He allowed the gang to
 work on November 12.

 The Claim here, which was presented on December 7, 1982, is for time and one-half pay in addition to what the Claimants have already received.

 The Board has closely reviewed the entire file and has considered the evidence properly before us. We find no Rule that would have prohibited the Carrier from acting favorably upon the request of its employes. Moreover, while there are numerous and varying contentions of both parties, concerning construction of the various Rules and what did and did not occur, the Board concludes that little purpose would be served in addressing these matters at this point, given our basic conclusion cited above. Accordingly, in arriving at our decision, we have given particular weight to the fact that the Claimants themselves asked for worked. Whether this should or should not have been done, or whether there was a legitimate understanding of which day would be substituted for which, is not material,

 Therefore, in view of all of the foregoing and the particular circumstances of this record, we f stated in its letter of October 21, 1983, to the General Chairman, is a fair and equitable resolution of this Claim and we so hold.
                      Award Number 26511 Page 2

                      Docket Number MW-26012


        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 in accordance with the Opinion.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of the Third Division


Attest: p

      Nancy J. Dever - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 9th day of September 1987.