Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 35573
Docket No. MW-33527
01-3-96-3-1088

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Dana E. Eischen when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


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. 35573
Page 2 Docket No. MW-33527
01-3-96-3-1088



During the period September 5 through 18,1995, the TCJ9 Switch Grinder was performing maintenancework on switches and turnouts throughout the Lewistown SubDivision. The TCJ9 S to ensure safe movement. R.I. Stewart was the Sub-Division Maintenance Foreman and usually performed duties associated with the piloting and general operation of the TCJ9 Switch Grinder during his normal tour of duty, from 7:00 A.M. until 3:30 P.M. with Saturday and Sunday as rest days. On the dates of September 5, 6, 9,10,11,12,13,16, 17, and 18, 1995, Stewart worked a total of 106.5 overtime hours as pilot for the switch grinder, at the premium rate of pay.


On the dates of the dispute, the Claimant was an assigned I&R Foreman and he performed track inspection duties during his normal tour of duty, 7:00 A.M. until 3:30 P.M. with Saturday and Sunday as rest days. In this case, the Claimant asserts entitlement by superior seniority as a Maintenance Foreman to all overtime work as pilot performed by Stewart on the claim dates. Careful examination of the record evidence shows that the Claimant has no valid claim to the overtime at issue. The Carrier's use of Stewart to perform on an overtime basis the same pilot work that was ordinarily and customarily performed by him during the course of his regularworkweek was in strict compliance with Rule 17 of the Agreement:





The Board has consistently held that Rule 17 overtime preference does not rely on seniority standing in the classification, per se, but rather runs in favor of the senior employee who ordinarily and customarily performed the work during the course of his/her workweek or day. See Third Division Awards 26710, 29435, 29551, 31664, 31673, 31674, 31924, 31925, 32293, 33165 and 33437.

Form 1 Award No. 35573
Page 3 Docket No. MW-33527
01-3-96-3-1088







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

                      NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                      By Order of Third Division


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of July, 2001.