"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Union Pacific Railroad:

Claim on behalf of J. C. Alvarez, for nine hours at his time and onehalf rate of pay, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly Rules 5, 7, 8, 13 and 15, when it required the Claimant to perform service outside his regular assigned hours on February 22, 2007 then failed to compensate him as required by the Agreement. Carrier's File No. 1472767. General Chairman's File No. N 15 672. BRS File Case No. 13977-UP."

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

The Claimant is assigned to the Signal Department and works a 2:30 P.M. to 10:30 P.M. shift. This claim protests the failure of the Carrier to compensate Claimant at the time and one-half rate of pay for his attendance at a required Rules training class outside of his assigned work hours on February 22, 2007 commencing at 8:00 A.M., when he returned and worked his normal assignment between 2:30 and 6:30 P.M. The Organization relies on Rules 5 (40-Hour Work Week) 7 (Shifts) 8 (Change of Shift) 13 (Overtime) and 15 (Calls) of the Agreement in support of Claimant's entitlement to the overtime pay rate. It involves an annual training class to instruct employees on the federally mandated Operating Rules and regulations applicable to the daily performance of signal work, which is similar in content to the training dealt with by the Board in Third Division Award 36628 and Public Law Board No. 6459, Award 12. Because the arguments of the Organization and the Carrier set forth in Third Division Awards 40599 and 40600 are identical to the ones

made in

A careful review of the record convinces the Board that this claim is governed by the holding and rationale of Award 40599, as well as the principle of stare decisis confirming the application of the mutuality of benefit exception to the "work or service" rule to classes on Operating or Safety Rules that occurred in this case. See Public Law Board No. 6459, Awards 12, 13, 26 and 35 and Third Division Awards 36628 and 39360. Thus, no violation of Rules 5, 13 or 15 has been established. Similarly, the finding that the Organization failed to sustain its burden of proving that the Claimant's shift times were changed in order for him to attend his training class, a prerequisite to a finding of entitlement to time and one-half pay under Rules 7 and 8, is equally applicable herein. Because the record makes clear that the Claimant was paid the straight time rate of pay for his attendance at the training class, as well as for the work he performed on the claim date, the claim for additional compensation must be denied.

ORDER