PROCEEDINGS BEFORE SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTIJENT N0. 239
 (ClerksQ Board, St. Louis, Missouri)

 PARTIES TO DISRJTE :

 BROTHERHOOD OF RAITI^TAY AID STEAMSHIP CLERKS, FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AID STATION EMPLOYES

Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 1. Carrier violated the ClerksQ Agreement when, on May 13, 195$, Clerk C. M. Brown, Clerk-Sealer-Baggageman, Durand, Kansas, was instructed verbally by Assistant Trainmaster, Mr. H. H. Gudger, to move from his regular assignment as Clerk-Sealer-Baggageman, hours 6 PM to 3 AM, meal period 10 PM to 11 PM, rate $16.88, rest days, Sunday and Monday, to the position of Chief Yard Clerk, hours 3:59 PM to 11:59 PM, rate $17.54, rest days, Saturday and Sunday, and notice to claimant, co$y to Division Chairman, was not given in writing as required by Rule 9(c) of the Clerks Agreement;

 2. The Carrier shall be required to compensate Clerk C. M. Brown as follows:

 Tuesday, May 13, 1955 2901%' (@ $1.09625 per hour, amount $ 2.21
 t4ednesday, May 714, 1958 29017 Q $1.09625 per hour; amount $ 2.21
 Friday, may 16, 1955 2901;7 @ $1.09625 per hour, amount $ 2.21
 Saturday, May 17, 1955 SQ @ x$2.11 per hour, amount $16.58
 Monday, May 19, 1955 29017 @ $1.09625 per hour, amount $ 2.21
 Tuesday, May 20, 1955 29017 @ $1.09625 per hour, amount 2.21
 $27.93

 account violation of Rules 9 and 25 of the ClerksQ Agreement.

 On the claimed dates here involved Clerk C. M. Brown, seniority date September 10, 1945, Station and Yards, Central Division, was regularly assigned to the seven day per week position of Clerk-Sealer-Baggageman at Durand, Kansas, 6 PP.f to 10 PM; 11 PM to 3 AM, rate ;'16.88, Tuesday through Saturday, rest days Sunday and Monday, and he was relieved on his assigned rest days by a Relief Clerk.


Clerk F. A. Harrod, seniority date November 11, 1918, was regularly assigned occupant of position of "Chief Yard Clerk,?? Durand, Kansas, six day position, rate $17.54, hours 3:59 PIT to 11:59 PM, Monday through Friday, and he was relieved on Saturday by a Relief Clerk, Sunday being an unassigned day for this position to work.

 Clerk Harrod was entitled to fifteen days vacation under Agreement provisions and was due on the vacation schedule to take his vacation for fifteen days beginning Monday, May 12, 1958 to run through Friday, May 30, 1958.

 The record indicates that Clerk Brown was verbally directed by Assistant Trainmaster, Mr. H. H. Gudger on May 13 to work the Chief Yard Clerk position, assigned hours 3:59 PT4 to 11:59 PM. The move was effective May 13, without written notice to Brown, copy to Division Chairman.

        Rule 9(c) of the Agreement provides as follows:


    77Ilhether the employe is moved from his regular position by direction of the Carrier or of his own volition, such arrangement for the move will be made a matter of record in order to avoid any disputes about verbal understandings, copy to Division Chairman.R


On May 21, 19589 the Superintendent addressed a letter to claimant which is in words and figures as follows:

                                  iniichita, Kansas, May 21, 1958

                                  A-830-2


    Mr. Clarence M. Brown

    Durand, Kansas


    This will confirm understanding reached between you and Asst. Trainmaster H. H. Gudger, concerning your protecting position of Chief Yard Clerk, Durand, Kansas, effective May 13, 1958, account vacation vacancy.


    This move was made under provisions of Rule 9(b) of the Clerks? Agreement due to no qualified extra or furloughed clerk available.


    cc ERG FRJ H. B. DAVIS/S/9a


By reason of the Carriers failure to make the move in question ·7a matter of record',? at the time, or prior to putting same into effect, the Rnployes have concluded that the Carriers right to make said move under the provisions of Rule 9(b) was Unegated·7 by reason of an alleged violation of Rule 9(c) and that the claim as stated should be sustained in accordance with the terms of Rule 25(e) which provides-

                            2

                              _

                                          SCiA 23°1

                                          Award No. 17


    "Employes notified or called to perform work not continuous with, before, or after the regular work period, or on rest days and specified holidays, shall be allowed a minimum of three hours for two hours work or less, and if held on duty in excess of two hours, time and one-half will be allowed on the minute basis.·o


Since, from the E~mployesf point of view, the attempt to move claimant from his assigned position to perform work on another position for the duration of a temporary vacancy was ineffectual by reason of failure to comply with the Employes' version of Rule 9(c), the contention is made that claimant is entitled to recover the difference between the pro rata rate which he was allowed for the Chief Yard Clerk position, and the punitive rate to which he believes himself entitled for working outside his assigned hours on May 13, 1/a., 16, 19 and 20, and, in addition, he claims eight hours at the pro rata rate of the Clerk-SealerBaggageman position for Saturday, May 17, 1958, account not permitted to work his own position on that date, which was a work day on that position but a rest day on the Chief Yard Clerk position.

 In declining the claim, Carrier took the position that Rule 9(c) contained no penalty clause; that claimant earned more as a result of working this assignment for the fourteen days out of the month on the Chief Clerkys assignment at Durand, than he would have earned on his own position, and, therefore, claim should not have been made.

 Carrier further contends that the record of this move was made in full compliance with Rule 9(c). In support, Carrier relies on the letter dated May 21, 1958, quoted above, a copy of which was furnished the Division Chairman. In that connection, it is Carrieres position that Rule 9(c) does not specify when the record must be made and since in this case it was made while the incumbent of the Chief Clerk position was still absent on vacation and ten days before his return, the requirements of the rule have been fully met in accordance with its stated purpose to avoid disputes about verbal understandings.

 With respect to the claim for May 17, Carrier feels that the loss of that day by claimant by reason of it being a rest day of the Chief Clerk position was offset by the fact that claimant had a day of work on May 19 which would have been a rest day on his own position. In any event, Carrier feels it would be an injustice to impose a penalty for "technical violations of rules" in the absence of any penalty provision being stated in the rule.

 The Board holds that the move in question was not arranged for as contemplated by Rule 9(c), and, therefore, claimant was under no duty to give up the hours and rest days of his regular assignment to relieve on another position at the pro rata rate, without some penalty attaching. The expression Narrangement for the move'? carries with it the clearly implied intent that one will not be divorced temporarily from his regular position by being moved to another position until he has been thus temporarily assigned as a Rmatter of record.72 One does not ordinarily arrange for something to be done after it already has been done, and we think the parties had in mind a written record of the move before or at the time, with notice to the Division Chairman, in order that there might be prompt redress for any disputed moves that were found to have been made in error.

        Accordingly, the claim will. be sustained.


                          -3-

                                          Award No. 17


FIP~ INGS:

 The Board, after oral hearing, and upon the record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended

 That jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein has been conferred upon this Board by special agreement; and

 That the Agreement by and between the parties to this dispute has been violated.

                          AWARD


        Claim sustained.


                              SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 239


                            /s/ A. Langley Coffee

                            A. Langley Coffey, Chairman


                            (s/ G. W. Johnson

                            Employer Member


                            Is/ Frank D. Luoton

                            Employes' Member


Dated at St. Louis, Missouri, this 21st day of July, 1959.