PARTIES TO
 THE DISPUTE: Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 Division - IBT Rail Conference
 VS.

ARBITRATOR: Gerald E. Wallin

 DECISION: Claim sustained.

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

    1. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier failed to assign Claimant M.

        D. Carr to perform overtime service operating a ballast regulator on June 8,

        2008 and instead assigned junior employe G. Sheetz (System File

        A02828908/2008-030078).


    2. As a consequence of the violation in Part 1 above, Claimant M. D. Carr shall

        be allowed sixteen (16) hours at his respective time and one-half rate of pay

        and two (2) hours at his respective double time rate of pay."


FINDINGS OF THE BOARD:

 The Board, upon the whole record and on the evidence, finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; that this Board is duly constituted by agreement of the parties; that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute, and that the parties were given due notice of the hearing.

 The instant dispute arose in connection with track repair work after a derailment occurred on the Carrier's main line on June 7, 2008. It is undisputed that claimant was senior to Mr. Sheetz, was available, was in the proper class for the disputed work, and was not called by the Carrier. The lack of an attempt to call claimant was not refuted by the Carrier in the on-property record.

 In its initial denial of the claim, the Carrier maintained that Mr. Sheetz did not work on the recovery from the derailment. In its later correspondence, the Carrier moved away from that position to one of claiming emergency circumstances permitted it to assign the work as it did.
 Public Law Board No. ? 163

    Award No. 66 Page 2


While it is true that the awards of dispute resolution boards do recognize allowances for dealing with emergencies, they do not condone outright lack of efforts to honor the seniority provisions of the Agreement. Even in emergencies, Carrier's are expected to try to comply with applicable Agreement requirements. The record before us establishes that the Carrier did not attempt to contact claimant as it should have.


AWARD:
    The Claim is sustained.


ierald E.-Wallin; Esq., Chairman=..

 _M. Bo e
 Ca'er MembeA"

I :

I evin Evanski,
 rganization Member

 Date:
    l ld /l