The Organization filed a claim contending, inter alia, that Claimant was shorted one and one-half hours pay during the pay period ending October 12, 1993. It contended that the Agreement required that GATD Dispatchers be paid or worked 40 hours per week as a dispatcher, and that Carrier is only permitted to reduce this guarantee for one of the reasons provided in Article III (B). The Organization maintains that Carrier is not privileged to reduce the weekly 40 hour guarantee by overtime worked on other days, when an employee is held over to give a statement, is used after hours to train an employee, etc., as to do so would render meaningless other rules of the Agreement that provide special compensation payments for service in such circumstances.

Furthermore, the Organization notes, in the history of the application of the Rule, it has never been administered in a manner whereby offsets in the guarantee were taken for overtime worked on other days, the situation under review here. Instead, the Organization insists, the clear and plain meaning of the language of the Rule, as evinced by its historical application, is that on any day that an employee was available for service, and is not used, he would be paid eight-hours pay for that day.

Carrier argues that Claimant received exactly 40 hours pay for the week ending October 12, 1993, and that is all that he is entitled to receive under the literal reading of the Agreement. His guarantee was not reduced in that week as alleged by the Organization, Carrier insists. It cites several Adjustment Board awards to support the notion that it is privileged to credit overtime earnings against weekly guarantees.

The Board notes that the Article III is not a complicated provision. In simple terms it states that Guaranteed Assigned Train Dispatchers will be guaranteed 40-hours nay in each seven day Period. And in the event that a Guaranteed Assigned Train Dispatcher does not receive 40-hours pay in a particular seven day period, (s)he will be paid the necessary additional hours at the straight time rate. There is no language in the Rule limiting the source of the 40-hours pay that comprises the weekly guarantee. Accepted tenets of contract construction, therefore, foreclose this Board from reading such limitations into the Rule. If the parties wanted to limit the 40-hours pay guarantee to just straight time hours, and/or eight hours per day, the situation here, they were capable of doing so. That they did not, indicates that all hours for which pay is received during the week are to be considered as contributing to the 40-hour guarantee.

But this does not mean that any hours worked at one and one-half times the straight time rate may be counted as one and one-half hours toward the 40-hour

guarantee. In this industry there are a number of different pay classifications. The most common, of course is straight time pay. Another would be holiday pay. A third would be vacation pay. A fourth would be overtime pay. A fifth would be pay for work performed on a holiday, or pay for a sixth and/or seventh days work. We also have deadhead, travel time, and waiting time pay, to name three others. The rate of pay for each classification varies. Overtime is usually paid for at one and one-half times the straight time rate, but payment at the double the straight time rate may be required in some situations. Holiday pay is usually at straight time, but if the employee works on a Holiday the time worked is paid for at the time and one-half rate. Rest day work is usually paid for at the time and one-half rate of pay, but there are Agreements that provide for a double time rest day pay for working the second rest day.

In each situation where the required rate to be paid is greater than the straight time rate of pay, it is important not to confuse the rate being paid with the hours worked For example, if an employee works eight hours on a holiday and is paid at the time and one-half rate, he is not receiving 12 hours pay, he is receiving eight hours pay at the negotiated rate of pay covering performance of work on a Holiday. This is more than a distinction without a difference. Since the period of Federal Control in 19171918, the holida the straight time rate. This is not the overtime rate pay, the penalty rate of pay, etc., it is the Holiday rate of pay. And because it is computed at one and one-half times the straight time rate of pay does not mean that an employee may be considered as having worked fifty percent more hours. (S)he only works the hours worked.

The same is true with respect to overtime worked before or after an assignment. The rate of pay for such work is one and one-half times the straight time rate. As this would be applied to the case under review here, Claimant did not work overtime for one and one-half hours on October 11, 1993. He worked iust one hour overtime and was paid at the time and one-half rate. Claimant was only on duty nine hours, not nine and one-half hours. He was only paid for one hour overtime, albeit at the time and one-half rate. Carrier was privileged to credit this extra hours pay toward the guarantee established by Article III but it was not privileged to treat this hour as one and one-half hours, merely because it was required to nay Claimant at one and one-half times the straight time rate for the work Performed on overtime. Because, inter alia, one and onehalf time

The Agreement guaranteed Claimant 40 hour's pay for the week ending October 12, 1993. For that week he was paid eight hours Qualifying pay, 24 hours Regular Pay, and one hours Overtime pay. Carrier allowed him six and one-half hours Guarantee pay. He is entitled to be paid an additional one-half hour Guarantee pay to make his total hours pay for the week equal 40.

The claim will be sustained for one-half hours pay at the rate of pay of the lowest rated position in the office.

AWARD