SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO. 186
Organization's File Carrier's File
R-953 TE-10-56
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim of the General Committee of The Order of Railroad Telegraphers on The Denver and Rio Grande Western
Railroad, that:
"1. Carrier violated the agreement between the parties
when it improperly suspended E. R. Cesario from his regular
assignment March 31 through April 13, 1956, used him on
another position and failed and refused to pay him the proper
compensation.
"2. Carrier now be required to compensate E. R.
Cesario 8 hours at the straight time rate on each of the work
days suspended, April 2, 3,
4, 5, 6,
9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 1956
and the difference between straight time and time and onehalf on his regular assigned rest days March 31 and April 1,
1956.11
FINDINGS: In Carriers relay telegraph office "J1`?" at Grand Junction, Colorado,
it maintained three shift around-the-clock telegraphic service, together with a
fourth position assigned 9 AM to 5 PM. At the time the regular holder of
the third shift position was off on vacation and the last available extra
telegrapher was filling the vacation vacancy and all four telegraphers were
working their rest days because no relief was available, the extra telegrapher,
who was filling the vacation vacancy, showed up for his 11 PM assignment intoxicated and resigned from the service. In order to keep the relay office
open, claimant Cesario was taken off the fourth assignment and used to
replaco the intoxicated employe on the 11 PM assignment.
Claimant was continued on that assignment from March 30 to April 13.
The first day he was paid at time and one-half rate for service on the second
6
Award No. 11 (Continued)
shift in a 24-hour period; for March 31 and April 1, he was paid eight hours
straight time plus one hour at overtime rate. During the remainder of the
period he was paid at time and one-half rate for each day, including one hour
overtime on every day except two.
Claim is here made for the difference between pro rata rate and
time and one-half rate for March 31 and April 1 account working on rest days
and for an additional day's pay for each working day April 2 to April 13
because suspended from his own assignment and required to work on a different
assignment. The Carrier asserts that an emergency existed and claimant was
properly paid.
For the work on March 31 and April 1, which were claimant's rest
days, we think he was entitled to pay at time and one-half rate, and that part
of the claim should be sustained.
As for the period April 2 to April 13, we think the situation shown
by Carrier constituted an emergency and Rule 9 (D) provides:
"(D) Regular assigned employes who because of an
emergency are required to perform relief work in the
same office and/or town which does not require a change
of residence, will do so for a period of three (3) days, i.e.,
three (3) shifts, without extra compensation. Beginning with
the fourth shift such employes will be paid time and one-half
for each such relief shift required to work."
and we think claimant was properly paid and that part of the claim should be
denied.
2 -
Award No. 11 (Continued)
AWARD: Claim sustained in part and denied in part as per findings.
Mortinmer Stone
Chairman, Neutral Member
r
L.
GHeinlein
Carrier Member
.,
A
Woodman
Or i~ tion Member
99
Dated at Denver, Colorado, August 30,
1957.
-3-