C
 0 SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTPMIT N0. 122
 P

THE LAKE ERIC AND EASTERN RAILROAD CO1IPANY
 vs
 BROTHERHOOD OF RAILITAY AND STEAP·ISHIP CLEE?,KS,
 FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLOYES
 AIIARD N0. !4
 CASE N0. 9

each date account of violation of Rule 30 of the Clerks' Agreement due to being
 required to absorb overtime on Check Room Attendant, Job 32, at East Youngstown,
 September 11, 1$ and 19, 1953. (CL-177)

 FINDINGS: The 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.

 The Board has ,jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein. The parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

 From the standpoint that the Clerical Extra List was exhausted, and that none of the regular clerks was agreeable to double oi.·.t or work on his relief day, it cannot be successfully urged that Claimant Fs handing of the Checkroom key, and possibly some other incidental Check room services, in addition to his regular duties of Assistant Crew Dispatcher, was either repugnant to the contractual seniority provisions, or in any way violative of Rules 10 and 30 of the Clerks' Agreement. In this situation it cannot be maintained either that claimant filled a temporary Checkroom attendant job vacancy, orthat he was required to suspend work for the purpose of absorbing overtime.

 AETARD: Claim denied.

/s/ Harold M. Gilden
 Harold M. Gilden, Neutral and Only
 Member thereof.
 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
 April 25, 1957