For 1 NATIONAL L ADJUSTMENT



                                          Docket . 0

                                          -3-03- -532


The Third Division consisted of the regular r members and in addition Referee
 Francis . Quinn when award as rendered.

    (Brotherhood of Railroad Sinalen TIE T DISPUTE:

                  (The Belt Railway Company f Chicago


STATEMENT F CL

        ,"Claim n behalf of the General Committee f the Brotherhood ailroad Signal en on the Belt Railway of Chicago:


      Clai on behalf of . J. Rizzo, for 1ous at the overtime rate pay, account Carrier violate the current Signal en's Agreement, articularly Rule 17()4, wen on Saturdays, arch 1 , 2 2, n

      y 11, 2002, it would not allow the Claimant, who as t

      Technician wit the most seniority, to rt a en day sift

      ositio in the a tower for the full our shift ft which began at

      7:. ® The Claimant as available for the 7: . : start,

      however, Carrier i start at 11:. ., denying i the

      rtui to or the full eight hour sift for each Saturday

      claimed. Carrier's File o. 3 0-Signal e . General Chairman's

      File . 02-50- C. S File Case o.1771- T."


    I


The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, s tat:

      Tcarrier r carriers s and the employee or employees involved in this dispute

are respectively carrier a employee e within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
 as approved June 21,1 3.
 r 1 Award N.37 1
 Page 2 Docket . S -3 0
 -3-03-3
 This Division f the Adjustment Board jurisictiver the dispute
 involved herein.

      Parties to said dispute were given due notice f hearing thereon.


      Fro the Board's revie f the arguments and evidence the parties durin

the on-property handling of this dispute, the Organization faile to meet its burden
 f proof. The Claimant as the only person who as qualified as signal employee
 and available to work on both dates under examination. The Claimant as the most
 alifiesignal employee, an it was proper that e a offered overtime in a anner that id not interfere with is regular assignment. Rule 17(A)s applie
 operly the Carrier. There s Signal Technician on n duty that worked the
 preceding four hours (7:00 . . - 11:00. .) and said employee was entitled to
 that overtime. The Carrier demonstrated pattern of past practice and that
 ractice a never been contested y the Organization. This clai lacks merit.

                        A


    Claim denied.


                            E


is Board, after consideratio the dispute identifled above, hereby orders
 tat an Award favorable the Claimant(s) not be made.

                      NATIONAL IS

                      Order Thir Division


ate t Chicago, Illinois, is 7t ay October