Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28123
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. SG-28106
 89-3-87-3-683
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the
 Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the National



A. The Carrier has violated the current Signalmen's Working Agreement, particularly Article 2, S is required by the Carrier to be performed on a day which is not part of any assignment, it may be performed by an available unassigned employee who will otherwise not have forty hours of work that week; in all other cases by the regular employee.

 B. On May 23, 1986 between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 3:30 a.m., a total of twelve hours and thirty minutes, Mr. J. Fowler, Signal Foreman, was asked to work overtime at 'JO' Tower, New York. The Trouble Desk, manned by Mr. J. Dahlstrom, was directed by Mr. J. Karp, Assistant Division Engineer, to call Mr. Fowler and Mr. Zamparelli and their men to work at 'JO'. Mr. Lenart and his men were available for work and were not instructed to do so by a Carrier Officer who should seniority order.

 C. Based on the above facts and the Carriers violation of the Working Agreement, we the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen feel that Mr. Lenart should be compensated for twelve hours and thirty minutes of pay at the rate of time and one-half, the current Signal Foreman rate of pay. Carrier file NEC-BRS-SD-252."

 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.
 Form 1 Award No. 28123
 Page 2 Docket No. SG-28106
 89-3-87-3-683
 Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
 On the morning of May 23, 1986, there was a fire at the JO Interlock-
 ing Tower in New York City. Carrier needed all available employees to work
 the emergency caused by the fire that day. The trouble desk attempted to call
 all employees and notify them that their services were needed at JO Tower for
 overtime work. Claimant, was called but could not be contacted. A message
 was left at his headquarters indicating that overtime work was available at JO
 Tower. Claimant never received the message. The organization contends that
 Carrier has an obligation to make a reasonable effort to contact employees
 eligible for overtime work and that, in this case, an effort was not made and
 men younger than Claimant were used to perform the overtime work.

 This Board has reviewed the total record of this case. Based on that review, we must conclude that Carrier exerted every reasonable effort to contact all available emplo get the message. That was his fault, not Carrier's.




                              By Order of Third Division


Attest:
        Nancy J,,Wer - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 25th day of September 1989.