Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29435
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-29579
 92-3-90-3-528
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Dana E. Eischen when award was rendered.

 (Brotheriood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISP'J"-: (Consolidated Rail Corporation

 STATEMENT OF CLAL1: lain .if the System Committee of the Brotherhood
 that:

 (1) The A4reernent was violated when the Carrier assigned junior employe R. Daum ~nstead of '-!t. D. Foutz to perform overtime service at South kron on April 23, 19739 ,>ystem Docket MW-608).

 (2) As a conseqkience of the aforesaid violation, Mr. D. Foutz shall be allowed thirt-en (:)) hours of pay at the trackman's time and one-half rate."

 FINDINGS:
The Th:-d Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evicence, finds :hat:

 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.

 The issue to be decided here is whether, by virtue of the Agreement and his normal work week assignments, the Claimant was entitled to perform the overtime service in question.

 Claimant entered Carrier service in August, 1975. At the time of the dispute, he was a temporary trackman assigned to the I5C gang headquartered at South Akron Yard, Akron, Ohio. His tour of duty was 7:00 A.M. to 3:30 P.M., rest days of Saturday and Sunday. The junior employee who worked the overtime entered service in May, 1978, and was working a temporary trackman vacancy for Basic Maintenance Gang 11682, also headquartered at South Akron Yard.

 During :;·,e week of ADri1 17 through 21, 1989, Claimant's gang was assigned to upgrace : of time, Basic ''ai.itenance Gang #1682, maintained and repaired track, both
 Form 1 Award No. 29435
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-29579
 92-3-90-3-528

 main and yard. The record convincingly establishes that Maintenance Gang ;11682 regularly was used for any derailment work necessary in the territory and the I&C Gang was not regularly so utilized.

 On Sunday, April 23, 1989, a derailment occurred at the South end of the Akron Yard, and Maintenance Gang #1682 was called out on overtime to perform necessary repair work, which included the junior Trackman.
On May 8, 1989, :he Organization submitted protest on behalf of Claimant for 13 hours pay at .)verti.ne rate citing violation of Rule 17. The Division Engineer denied the Claim the Senior Director-Labor Relations, the Carrier's highest appeals officer. Claim was denied by Senior Director on January 7, 1990.





Under. the cited ruLe, overtime preference 4i11 be afforded to qualified, available employees wh of their cork day/week. G"men the derailment occurred on April 23, 1989, the Carrier determined that over_Lme was required. Carrier arranged for Gang #1682, customarily used to repair derailments, to perform the work. Carrier also points out -hat such lerailment work was not work ordinarily and customarily perfornei by the < a aimant's I&C Gang. According to Carrier, therefore, Claimant was not entitled to be called t
For its part, the Organization asserts that the Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned a junior employee, rather than the Claimant, to perform the overtime service on April 23, 1989. Claimant was available and fully qualified to perform the overtime work, and as senior employee, should have been called upon to do so. For these reasons, Organization maintains that Claimant is entitled to receive the remedy requested.

 There is no question that Claimant is senior employee in this dispute, however, the distinquLshi not work the Claimant ordinarily and customarily performed. While the two gangs may have been working "shoulder to shoulder" performing track rehabilitation work, the junior Form 1 Award No. 29435
 Page 3 Docket No. MW-29579
 92-3-90-3-528
 On these particular facts, the Board finds no probative evidence that
 the Agreement was violated. Therefore, this Claim must be denied.




                            By Order of Third Division


Attest:
      'Nancy J. e - CKe~utive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, iLlinods, this 21st day of October 1992.

 1