This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The Claimant is seeking payment at the overtime rate due to the alleged failure of the Carrier to appropriately pay him for service beyond 40 hours during the week of April 27, 1999. There is no dispute in this record on the facts as they pertain to the disputed rate. On April 27 and 28, 1999 the Claimant attended Crane Safety Class beginning at 6:30 A.M, ending at 4:00 P.M. with an additional half hour of travel, or ten hours per day. The Claimant also attended Crane Safety Class on April 29, 1999 going on duty at 6:30 A.M. and ending at 2:00 P.M. with an additional half hour of travel time. As per Rule 11, he was paid at the straight time rate for the 28 hours of attendance at the safety class. The Claimant worked his normal shift of eight hours on April 30 (with one hour paid at the overtime rate) and eight hours on May 1, 1999. In all, it is not disputed that he ended the week with 44 hours paid at the straight time rate. However, the claim at bar is that because the Claimant exceeded his eight hours in any day on both April 27 and 28, the straight time rate was improper as per Rule 5(j) as he was due 2 hours of overtime on both days, but was inappropriately paid.
The Carrier denied the claim maintaining that travel was not to be computed in paying overtime, as per Rule 11. It further argued that because the time disputed not only included travel time, but also was for the purpose of training, it was not covered by Rule 5(j). It was the Carrier's position throughout this claim that the Claimant had been appropriately compensated.
The Board paid close attention to the Organization's arguments with regard to the language of the Rules at issue. We note that the Organization maintains that the Carrier did not schedule the Crane Safety Classes during the Claimant's regular hours and is therefore responsible for the overtime payment. The Organization focuses upon the language of Rule 11 holding that training "will if possible" be during regular working hours and the Carrier exceeded those hours.
The cited Rules do not support the Organization's position. Rule 5(j) - Weekly Overtime states, in pertinent part: Form 1 Award No. 36859
Rule 11 - EXAMININATIONS OR RE-EXAMINATIONS states, in pertinent part, that:
Rule 19 - TIME AND EXPENCES (OTHER THAN TRAVELING CREWS OR INSPECTORS) states, in pertinent part, that:
The Carrier pointed out on the property that Rule 5(j) specifically relates to "Work in excess of forty hours. . ." and that training is not "work." It further pointed out that the Claimant had included travel time in calculating the four hours beyond the eight hours on the two days of Crane Safety Class and the hours of travel were clearly to be paid at the straight time rate under Rule 19 and Rule 11. The Board finds that attendance at Crane Safety Class is covered by Rule 11. The Board also finds that the Carrier's position that "it was necessary for a small portion of the school to be held outside of normal hours. . ." and that such was "not excessive" is not shown to be improper. Form 1 Award No. 36859
The Board concludes that the Rules support the Carrier in all respects. The operative Rules and language do not require overtime payments as sought by the Organization. The Claimant was not working or considered to be working while he was attending Crane Safety Classes under the language of the Rules, supra. Therefore, the claim must be denied.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.