Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 37686
Docket No. CL-38288
06-3-04-3-255
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.
(Transportation Communications International Union
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the System Committee of the Organization (GL-13041)
that:
1) Carrier violated the Agreement on Saturday, November 10,
2001 when it used a junior employee to
rill
a vacant position
(15"
trick DAC Clerk).
2) Carrier shall now be required to compensate Joseph S. Forkin,
Jr., eight hours pay (8 hrs. pay) at the time and one-half rate
($18.34 per hour) for Saturday November 10, 2001, which he
would have received had he been afforded the opportunity to
accept the vacant position.
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.
Form 1 Award No. 37686
Page 2 Docket No. CL-38288
06-3-04-3-255
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
A. Johnson held an Extra Board position with a seniority date of December 7,
2000. She worked a vacant position at the straight time rate on Saturday,
November 10, 2001. Ms. Johnson had missed a day of work during the week and
was eligible to work the Saturday assignment on a straight-time basis. J. Forkin, a
regularly assigned employee with a seniority date of September 9, 1972, was on his
rest day. He was available and willing to work the Saturday vacancy. It is
contended that he should have been called as an overtime assignment. The instant
claim was filed protesting the Carrier's action of assigning A. Johnson to the
Saturday, November 10, 2001, vacancy, rather than Clerk Forkin, a more senior
employee than Johnson. The claim was denied at all levels and placed before the
Board for resolution.
The Board reviewed each party's position and the contract language on which
their respective positions are based. As a result of that review, the Board concluded
that Article 4(A)(3) and (A)(5) pertains to this dispute. See below:
"A. Appendix E to the parties' Agreement
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION AND
ITS EMPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY THE BROTHERHOOD
OF RAILWAY, AIRLINE, AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS,
FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION
EMPLOYEES.
Article 4
(A)(3) In the allocation of work protected by these extra boards,
extra employees, first out, whose use would involve payments at
Form 1 Award No. 37686
Page 3 Docket No. CL-38288
06-3-04-3-255
overtime rates will not be used so long as there are available other
employees on the particular extra board involved who are qualified
and available to perform the work at the straight-time rate.
(A)(5) When no extra board employees on the particular extra
board involved are available at the straight time rate of pay, the
work will be distributed as provided in Articles 5, 6, and 7 of this
Agreement."
In the instant case, A. Johnson was an Extra Board employee from an Extra
Board that protected the vacancy involved. She was eligible to work the assignment
on a straight-time basis. Assigning her to the work was appropriate.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
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 30th day of January 2006.