Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 40908
Docket No. SG-40894
11-3-NRAB-00003-090206
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Gerald E. Wallin when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Belt Railway Company of Chicago
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Belt Railway of Chicago:
Claim on behalf of R. H. Rogers, for 36 hours at his time and onehalf rate of pay, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly Rule 17(A3), when it used a junior
employee to perform overtime work on a signal cutover instead of
the Claimant on June 18, 19, and 20, 2007, and deprived the
Claimant of the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File
No. 08-BRSA-001. General Chairman's File No. 07-07-BRC. BRS
File Case No. 14177-BELT."
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. 40908
Page 2 Docket No. SG-40894
11-3-NRAB-00003-090206
Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.
The instant dispute results from a conflict of material fact. The Claimant
asserts that he was entitled to be offered the overtime assignment described in the
Statement of Claim because of his greater seniority. According to his statement, he
did not decline the overtime opportunity because he was never offered it. According
to the Carrier, the supervisor did contact the Claimant to offer the overtime work,
but the Claimant declined because he had other plans during the time frame in
question. The record contains a work record that appears to contradict the
Claimant's position; however, other evidence in the record contradicts the accuracy
of the work record.
It is well settled that the Board is an appellate tribunal that has no effective
means of reconciling disputes of material fact. When a record presents the Board
with such a conflict, it has no choice but to deny the claim for failing to satisfy the
burden of proof. It must do so in this case as well.
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 10th day of March 2011.