SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0 . 171
Av1ARD N0. 52 CASE N0. 52

 BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP CLERKS, ~'

 FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EMPLO S

 GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks Freight Handlers,, Express and Station Employes that the Carrier violated the current agreement ands

 1. That the Carrier be required to compensate each of the following named employes account non-compliance with the Agreement of July 30, 1919, covering rates of pay applicable to employes holding accumulated rest day assignments as follows:

 S. Glicken One days pay at the rate of time and one-half for each of the dates of December 21 and 28, 1957 and January 4. 1958, which are rest days accumulated by this employe*

 C. Branvold One day's pay at the rate of time and one-half for each of the dates of December 21 and 28, 1957 and January 4j 1958, which are rest days accumulated by this employe.

 0, Shabert One day s pay at the rate of time and one-half for the date
 of January 4. 1958 which was a rest day accumulated by this employe.

 B, Hodges One day s pay at the rate of time and one-half for each of the dates of December 28, 1957 and January 4, 1958, which are rest days accumulated by this employe.
the dates of December 14, 21 and 28, 1957 and January 4o 1958 which are rest days
 accumulated by this employe.

 A. Odegaard One day's pay at the rate of time and one-half for each of the dates of December 21 and 28, 1957 and January 4) 1958, which are rest days accumulated by this employe.

 M. Peterson One day's pay at the rate of time and one-half for the
 date of January 4, 1958 which was a rest day accumulated by this employe.

 DeWitt Johnson One day's pay at the rate of time and one-half for each of the dates of December 14, 21 and 28$ 1957 and January !tj 1958, which are rest days accumulated by this employes

 less any straight time allowance granted to the above named employes for rest day service performed.

2. In addition thereto, that the Carrier also be required to compensate the following employes, account failure on the part of the Carrier to permit each of them their respective right to exercise seniority and work positions of their choice, as free agents., when their positions were abolished,
of January 13p 14 and 15., 1958, account denied the right to fill Yard Checker
 position to which assigned by bulletin. Hours of assignment 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM,

 C, Branvold One days pay at the pro-rata rate for each of the dates of January 13,s 14 and 15.9 1958, account denied the right to fill Baggage Checker ,$ position. Hours of assignment 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM.

 0. Shabert One days pay at the pro-rata rate for the date of January 13p 1958, account denied the right to fill position of checker. Hours of assignment 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM,
of January 15P 16 and 17j, 1958, account denied the right to fill Steno Position,
 Hours of assignment 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM,
January 14,, 15s 16 and 19$ 1958,, account denied the right to fill Yard Checker
 position. Hours of assignment 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM.

 A. Odegaard One days pay at the pro-rata rate for each of the dates of January 13.. 14 and 15, 1958 account denied the right to fill Checker position, Hours of assignment 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM,

 M. Peterson One days pay at the pro-rata rate for the date of January 20, 1958 account denied the right to fill the position of Checker_ Hours of assignment 12:00 Midnight to 8:00 AM.

 DeWitt Johnson One days pay at the pro-rata rate for each of the dates of January 16A 171 18 and 19, 1958 account denied the right to fill the position of Expedite Driver, Hours of assignment 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM.

 FINDINGS:

 The employees state that the Carrier has violated the agreement of July 30,, 1949) and that it be required to compensate the claimants who held accumulated rest days and who were refused their right to exercise seniority on other positions by the Carrier;

 Employees further state that on January 3., 1958 the Carrier issued a wire notice to these claimants notifying them that their positions were being abolished, with one exception, effective with the date of January 10., 1958, at the end of each assignment; that in conjunction with the notice of abolishment, the Carrier issued bulletins No. 1 through 6. inclusive, re-establishingo by change in assignment and/or re-assignment of work, these same positions. That the Carrier bulletined the new assignments in advance so as to accomplish continued service in accumulation up to January 10, 1958, and at the same time have on that date the
                                        AWARD N0. 52 CASE N0. 52


successful applicants to the new 5 day positions that would go into effect on Monday, January 13, 1958. That each of the claimants upon being notified that their positions under the accumulation set up were being abolished, filed a claim at the punitive rate for the number of days each had accumulated and., in addition thereto each of the employees, upon having their positions abolishedo notified the Carrier of their desire to displace or exercise seniority to the position of their choice and that the Carrier denied each of these claimants their right to exercise disp. placement rights under the Effective Agreement,

        Agreement of July 30., 1949, Section (3) reads as follows:


    "(3) It is agreed that in cases where it is not practicable to provide relief by the establishment of a relief assignments as contemplated by Paragraph (e) of Section 1, Article II of the Match 19th 1949 agreement such rest time may be accumulated, with the understanding that such accumulation will be limited to ten (10) days,


    If an employe who has accumulated relief days bids in or transfers to another position before he can be relieved for the number of rest days accumulated, he shall be allowed additional compensation for such accumulated rest days at one-half rate, provided he had previously only received pro rata for working same.


    Employes who leave the service with accumulated rest days due them; will, if they have been paid pro rata for working such relief days be paid an additional one-half rate for each such day., except that employes who leave the service of the carrier of their own volition for any purpose other than to accept an annuity under the Railroad Retirement Act shall forfeit their right to such added compensation."


The Carrier states that the Agreement of July 30, 1949, was entered into with the Organization to provide for accumulative relief assignments where established for employees on 6 day positions at the Carrier's Grand Forks Freight office. That under the arrangement each employee worked 6 days each week for 5 weeks, accumulating one rest day each week; and he then was relieved for the entire 6th week, such employee receiving 5 days straight time pay for each of the 6 weeks, including the week of rest; that during January, 1958.9 the accumulative relief set up at the Grand Forks Freight office was terminated and in order to accomplish this the accumulative assignments were abolished and new 5 day positions were bulletined; that the eight claimants in this docket are employees who had accumulated rest days under the accumulated set up and exercised seniority to other jobs, That those claimants were relieved for the rest days they had accumulated before starting work on their new assignments, That all the claimants have already been paid one straight time day for each rest day accumulated. That none of the claimants have accumulated more than 4 rest days and therefore none was relieved for more than 4 days before resuming work,

 It is the Carrier's position that they were required to reliove these employees for the rest days accumulated and the penalty provisions of the Agreement were written to discourage any contrary handling.

                        - -3-

                                        AWARD N0. 52 CASE N0. 52


The Carrier further states that the claimants were not entitled to commence work immediately on their new assignments irrespective of the requirements of the accumulated agreement and that there is no rule in the Ftfective Agreement which provides that the claimants were entitled to commence work immediately on the new assignment, that Rule 10(d) contemplates that successful applicants who have been assigned to bulletined positions may be held off before assignment as long as 5 days after notice of assignment.

 The Arbitrator finds from a careful reading of the submissions and the argument advanced by the parties, that these claimants were relieved on their accumulative rest days and that therefore the Carrier did not violate the Memorandum of.Agreement of July 30., 19119, and these claimants were properly paid by the Carrier for their accumulated rest days.

        The Arbitrator further finds that under Rule 10(d) which reads as follows:


    11(d) Successful applicants for bulletined positions will be placed thereon as quickly as necessary transfers can be effected but not later than five (5) calendar days after notice of assignment, If not placed upon the position within the specified time limit, successful applicants thereafter will receive not less than the rate of the position to which assigned, If there are no qualified applicants on bulletin and no applicants for transfer from other seniority districts under Rule 20, such positions may be filled by the Company from such source of supply as it deems proper."


that successful applicants for bulletined positions will be placed thereon as quickly as necessary transfers can be effected but not later than five days. That gives the Carrier the right to fill bulletined positions up to 5 days after the successful applicant has been announced, Therefore, the Carrier did not violate the Effective Agreement when these employees were relieved and were not placed upon the bulletined positions they bid in within the 5 days, but were placed upon the positions under the wording of Rule 10(d). Also, under Rule 18(a) these claimants who had their positions abolished did not attempt to bump any junior employee they desired to replace nor did they file written request to do so, but bid in the new 5 day positions as bulletined. Therefore, the violation of Rule 18(a) is not well taken by the Organization.

                        A W A R D


        Claim 1 and Claim 2 denied in accordance with the opinion.


                                    /s/ Thomas C. Begley

                                    Thomas C. Begley, Chairman


                                  /s/ C. A, PC ar30n

                                  C. A.Poarson, Carrier Member


                                  /s/ C. C. Donewith

                                  C. C. Denewith, Employee Member


Signed at St. Paul, Minnesota this 10th day of February.* 1959.