Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32155
Docket No. MW-31397
97-3-93-3-300

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (CP Rail System (former Delaware & Hudson Railway ( Company, Inc.)

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:





FINDINGS:

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.
Form 1 Award No. 32155
Page 2 Docket No. MW-31397
97-3-93-3-300



The Organization contends that the Claimant, classified as a Plumber, was denied eight hours' overtime work following his regularly assigned shift. The overtime work was instead assigned to a Mechanic, junior to the Claimant.


There is no dispute that the Claimant was working for the full regular shift with an Electrician on the date at issue and had apparently been doing so for some time. Under Rule 11.8, the Organization argues the Claimant should have continued to work with the Electrician for the overtime assignment. Rule 11.8 reads as follows:




The Carrier stated, during the claim handling procedure on the property, that the Claimant had been utilized for welding during the course of the regular workday; the overtime work assigned to the Electrician was the setting up of lights for an emergency as a result of a derailment. For this work, the Carrier contended that a Mechanic is regularly employed, although - as argued by the Organization - the Carrier provided no evidence to document this contention. There was no contradiction, however, to the fact that the overtime assignment differed in nature from that performed "ordinarily and customarily" by the Claimant in his assistance to the Electrician.


In this state of the facts, the Board is not persuaded that Rule 11.8 was violated when the Claimant was not assigned the work of assisting the Electrician in connection with emergency lighting for a derailment.





Form I Award No. 32155
Page 3 Docket No. MW-31397
97-3-93-3-300



This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.



                      Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of August 1997.