"Claim _n behalf of Train Dispatcher K. D. Gerald for one day's pay at pro-rata rate of trick train dispatcher on each date January 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27, 1991."

The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.

In January 1991, Dispatcher D. R. Russel was scheduled for ten days annual vacation. Dispatcher K. D. Gerald, requested to work the vacation absence, which request was denied. vacation Relief Dispatcher w. R. Wilkinson worked the vacation absence. Gerald worked his own job, and also submitted ten time slips, one for each vacation day, seeking a hours pro rata pay account 11... denied right to exercise seniority to D. R. Russel vacation. 11 The organization contends that Gerald is entitled to payment under the provisions of Article 4 (d) and Article 5 (b), because he was only employee that requested to work the vacancy. These provisions provide:

"ARTICLE 4 - FILLING POSITIONS

(d) In filling positions of train dispatcher, ability being sufficient, seniority as a train dispatcher shall govern.

ARTICLE 5 - TEMPORARY VACANCIES

(b) Temporary vacancies of ninety (90) days or less duration shall not be bufletined, but shall be assigned to the senior qualified applicant."

Carrier defends on the basis that it has never considered vacations to be temporary vacancies subject to the application of Article 5. Further, that the vacancy was filled by the Dispatcher assigned to the regularly assigned relief position, which was established by Agreement between the parties to perform unassigned relief work, including vacations. Also, the employee used was senior to Claimant. And Claimant is not entitled to additional compensation, in any event, because he was fully employed at the time.

When Claimant made a request to work Dispatcher Russell's vacation relief, more senior Dispatcher Wilkinson had been assigned to the "regularly assigned relief position" that had been established by Paragraph 7 of the December 12, 1978 Letter Agreement reading:

"A minimum of one regularly assigned relief position

will be established and maintained to perform relief work, including %racations. Incumbent (s) of such positions (s) to be used in the same manner as extra dispatchers, seniority to govern between two or more and such positions will not have assigned rest days."

The text of this provision of the Letter Agreement, which, from complete review of this record appears to have been in place at the time of this claim, provides that the relief dispatcher will perform vacation relief work. That is what occurred on the dates involved in this claim. Claimant was not entitled to move on to a vacation relief hold down when the job was being filled by the incumbent of the relief assignment, a more senior employee, who held the job by bid. Accordingly the Board must conclude that the claim is without merit.

AWARD