DECISION OF COMMITTEE CREATED BY
PEfORAND(TM AGREEMENT DATED JUNE
29p 19169
UPON DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THE AUGUST 1ls
198
RUMS AGREEMENT
BETWEEN RAILROADS REPRESENTED BY THE
EASTERN., WESTERN AND SOUTHEASTERN CARRIERSO CONFERENCE COMMITTEES
AND THE EMPLOYEES OF SUCH RAILROADS REPRESENTED BY THE
BROTHERHOOD OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS
BROTHERHOOD O' LOCOMOTIVE FIREMEN AND ENGINE24EN
SWITCHM °S UNION OF NORTH AMERICA
with
B. R'. ABERNETHY
SITTING WITH THE COMMITTEE AS A MEMBER -THEREOF
SPB'rFAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT No. 685
Chicago' Illinois ® January 32E 196?
PARTIES Switchmen's Union of North America
TO and
DISPUTE: Chicago., Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company
STAT-NT Claim is made for a minimum day's pays at time and one half
OF CLAIM: rates on July 4s 1964 in favor of Switchmen J. C. Bates.,
D. fit. Roberts, ft. L. Knapps Ko E. Sisks Oo So George and Do
L_ Kokers all of whom hold seniority as switchmen in the
Carrier's Silviss Illinois Terminal. (Corrected by deletion)
FINDINGS: Two separate Agreements are in effect and govern the relations
between these parties. Ones an Agreement dated August its
19489
contains an overtime provision applicable in Yard and Hustler
services Section
9(c)
which provides:
Ltiere an extra man comences work on a second shift in
a twenty=four hour period he shall be paid at time and
one-half for second shift except when it is started
twenty-two and one-half to twenty=four hours from the
starting tin a of the first shift.
The other Agreement pertinent here,, dated June
25s 196116
Article
Iq Section 1(b) provides as follows concerning work performed on specified
holidays:
Yard service employees who work on any of the seven
specified holidays shall be paid at the rate of time
and onehalf for all services performed on the holiday
with a minumum of one and one-half times the rate foe
the basic day.
Ww^UNA-b
~2
The claimants in this case performed yard service on a
3·55
yard assignment on July 38
1964.
Thereafter they also protected a
7:55
A.M, extra yard assignment on July
4,
3.964. In so doing, they performed
a second shift within twenty=two and one-half hours in yard service on
an extra yard assignment. Service performed on the
7x55
A.M. shift was
also performed on an established holiday, July 48
19640
Carrier paid claimants for work performed on the holiday July
4, 1964,,
eight hours at time and one-half as required by the June
25, 19611
Agr®emento Claimants request an additional eight hours' pay at time and
one=half under the terms of Section
9(c)
of the August lls 1948 Agreement.
Carrier contends that in making one payment of time and one-half rate for
service performed on July
4$ 1964
(a holiday) it complied with the
requirements of Article III, Section
9(c)
of the Switchman°s Schedule and
the requirements contained in Article I of the June 25, 196!1 Agreement.
These Agreemants contain no prohibition against duplication
of premium payments. Neither Agreement calls for or provides for the
deduction from payments due under it any payments made under term.. of
the other. Payment of premium pay for service performed on the holiday
as required by Article I, Section 1(b) of the June
25, 1964
Agreement
cannot abrogate the Carrier's separate obligation to pay premium pay
for commencing a second shift within twenty-two and one=half hours as
required by Section 9(c) of the August lls 1948 Agreement. These are
two separate and distinct Agreements and two separate and distinct contractual obligations, which this Board may not alter under the guise of
interpretation
o
If this duplication of payments for service perform®d
during the same hours is to be barred' it must be barred by negotiation
and agreement of the parties.. For this Board to bar such duplication
would be for it to add to and modify the Agreements. This the Board has
no authority to doo
DECISION: Claim sustained.
EMPLOYEE PEERS CARRIER MENBERS DISSENTING
/s/ L. L. Loomis /s/ J. W. Oram
/s/ M. W. Hampton /s/ M. E. Parker
/s/ G. M. Seaton Jr.
NEUTRAL M31BER
Byron R. Abernethy