     

  

     

    



  

  

  

    

        

          

          

         

           

          

      

            

           

           

          

         

      

             

             

  

            



           

            

           

PLBNO. 7566

AWARD NO. 267

employees, ordinarily performed the work, and should have received the overtime opportunity.

The Carrier responds that Claimants were working overtime on February 4, 2019, due to a snowstorm. They left without checking to see if there was additional continuous overtime due to the snowstorm. It was common knowledge that there was overtime available for those that were willing to stay for it. These Claimants left without staying for additional overtime with the supervisor. They were not released and simply left with the gang. The Organization does not dispute that Claimants knew to ask about continuing overtime but declined inquiring about the opportunity to work it. Claimants could have worked the overtime, but chose not to work it.

The Organization must provide substantial evidence supporting the elements of the claim. Here, the Organization has established that Claimants were senior to the employees who performed the work. However, the Organization cannot establish that Claimants were available for the overtime. The Carrier has established that Claimants left with the gang. The evidence shows that the employees were aware of the continuing snow removal overtime and chose not to work it.

Claim denied.

Adam Gilmour Organization Member

Steven Napierkowski Carrier Member

C_g_

Brian Clauss Neutral Member

Dated: December 18, 2024

- - -

2