Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27627
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. SG-27077
88-3-86-3-130
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Gil Vernon when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
STATEMENT OP CLAIM: "Claim on behalf of the General Committee on the National
Rail Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK):
Claim on behalf of J. H. Redmon who is a Maintainer C&S headquartered
in Baltimore, MD. His regularly assigned hours are 0700-1530 Monday through
Friday, with relief days on Saturday and Sunday.
(a) Claim that the Carrier violated Article 2 (sect. 23, para. h) of
the agreement between the Carrier and the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen,
effective June 1, 1943. The agreement was violated when the Carrier used
E. R. Sherrod to make circuit revisions at Landover interlocking from 0700
thru 1630 hours on September 29, 1984, and from 0700 thru 1700 hours on
September 30, 1984. Mr. Sherrod was making the revisions as preparation for
the Landover signal cutover.
At the time of occurrence, Mr. Redmon was the section maintainer
headquartered at Landover, MD.
(b) Claim that Mr. Redmon be paid nine and one half hours at the
time and one half rate of pay for the hours worked by Mr. Sherrod on September
29, 1984, and ten hours pay at the time and one half rate of pay for the hours
worked by Mr. Sherrod on September 30, 1984. Mr. Redmon was available for the
above mentioned overtime, but he was not called. Mr. Redmon was regularly
assigned as the Landover section maintainer, and he should have been used
ahead of Mr. Sherrod."
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 waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
Form 1 Award No. 27627
Page 2 Docket No. SG-27077
88-3-86-3-130
The most basic of facts are undisputed. The Carrier decided late in
the day on September 28, 1984, that overtime was going to be required on the
Claimant's territory on Saturday and Sunday, September 29 and 30, 1984. There
is no dispute that under Article 2, Section 23, paragraph (h) the Claimant was
entitled to first consideration for the overtime.
The dispute centers, not around the Claimant's entitlement to the
job, but instead around the Carrier's efforts to contact the Claimant. The
Organization does not believe they were adequate or reasonable. Moreover, it
is the Organization's contention that, notwithstanding the Carrier's efforts
to contact the Claimant on Friday, there was no attempt to contact the Claimant on Saturday for the
that the efforts were reasonable and there was no obligation to make separate
calls for Saturday and Sunday.
It is the conclusion of the Board that the Carrier's efforts at contacting the Claimant were rea
training classes at 1:00 P.M. on Friday. The Supervisor, a bargaining unit
employee, who was assigned to fill out a six person crew for the weekend, was
due to leave work at 3:30 P.M. He kept one of the slots open for the Claimant
until 3:15 P.M. Up to this time and prior to this he made several attempts to
reach the Claimant. At 3:15 P.M. the Supervisor contacted someone else.
The Organization contends these efforts to reach the Claimant should
have continued until 11:00 P.M. However, under these unique facts including
the nature of the work project, the timing of the decision, and the nature of
the Supervisor's assignment, it was reasonable to go to the next person on the
list. At 3:15 P.M. it was prudent and reasonable for the Supervisor to assure
he had a complete compliment of employees for Saturday by the time his shift
ended at 3:30 P.M. Nor was it unreasonable in view of these same factors to
treat the overtime opportunity as a single vacancy.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
71
Attest:
N
4;;
ancy J. - Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of November 1988.