Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27616
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. SG-25708
88-3-84-3-213
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Southern Pacific Transportation Company
( (Eastern Lines)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claims of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (Eastern Lines):
Claim No. 1. Carrier file: 403-94-A
On behalf of Signalman Kenneth Saunders for 44 1/2 hours time and half and 7
1/2 hours double time account Carrier used a junior Signalman to service
generators on August 19, 20 and 21, 1983, which were connected to the signal
system to temporarily replace electrical power service interrupted by
Hurricane Alicia.
Claim No. 2. Carrier file: 403-93-A
On behalf of Signalman B. J. Perry for twenty-four hours time and half account
Carrier used other than a signal employee to service generators on August 20
and 21, 1983, which were connected to the signal system to temporarily replace
electrical power service interrupted by Hurricane Alicia."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and
all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this
dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes received notice of
these disputes as a third party at interest and declined to participate.
These claims concern work performed on Saturday and Sunday, August
20-21, 1983, in servicing electrical generators utilized on a temporary basis
to replace power service interrupted by Hurricane Alicia. Claimants are
Form 1 Award No. 27616
Page 2 Docket No. SG-25708
88-3-84-3-213
Signalmen who did not perform this work. In the first claim, the Claimant
contends the work was performed by a junior Signalman; in the second claim,
the Claimant states that the work was improperly assigned to an employee other
than a Signalman.
The Carrier's principal contention is that both Claimants were on
vacation for the regularly scheduled workdays Monday through Friday, August
15-19, 1983, and thus not eligible for overtime call on the rest days
(Saturday and Sunday) which were part of their vacation week.
Third Division Award 23198 reviews previous Awards on this point and
supports the view, as argued by the Carrier here, that an employee "has no
rights to return to service [from vacation] until the first workday on which
he is scheduled to return to work." Similarly, Second Division Award 7900
also reviewing previous Awards, states as follows:
. . . the vacation agreement under which the
parties are governed refers to periods of five
days. This relates to work days for which an
employe shall receive vacation pay. It does not
set vacation period, or such period's beginning
and end, which, as noted above, has been mutually
understood and accepted as a fixed time interval
inclusive of both work days and related rest days."
The record here shows no contention that the two Claimants were not
on vacation for the period prior to the weekend which would have been their
rest days.
With this conclusion, it is not necessary to examine the Scope Rule
argument in reference to the instance involving the second Claimant where an
employee other than a Signalman was called. Based on the discussion above,
the Claimant had no call on work during the week-long vacation period, and the
argument as to Scope Rule coverage is moot and requires no determination here.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
Nancy J. a -Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of November 1988.