REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL Between:     United States Postal Service                                                                        Grievant:    Class
                   and National Postal Mail Handlers Union                                                     Post Office:    SLC,  P&DC
Before:        Eduardo Escamilla, Arbitrator                                                                      Case No: E98M-1E-C01151155                                                                                       DP0401
Appearances:    for U.S. Postal Service:  Nancy Oman                        for the Union:  Woody Hendrickson
Place of Hearing:  Salt Lake City, Utah
Date of Hearing:   April 23, 2002
Record Closed:    May 20, 2002
Date of Award:    June 19, 2002

ISSUE:  Although this case involves an issue listed in the National Mamorandum of understanding on Expedited Arbitration, the parties agreed to submit this grievance to regular arbitration on a non-precedential basis.  However, they were unable to agree on the statement of the issue to be decided.  Accordingly, they stipulated that I would have the authority to frame the issue based on the evidence and arguments presented. After considering the positions of the parties and the record as a whole, I find and order that the issue is properly framed as follows:
    Did the Postal Service violate Article 8.5 of the National Agreement and/or Article 8.3 of the Local Memorandum of Understanding when it did not utilize Mail Handlers Wasden and /or Preston for overtime on April 7, 2001?  If so, what is the appropriate remedy?

OPINION:   Having carefully reviewed all the evidence in this record, and having considered each argument raised by the parties, it is my conclusion that the Postal Service did not violate Article 8.5 of the National Agreement and/or Article 8.3 of the LMOU when it did not utilize Mail Handlers Wasden and/or Preston for overtime on April 7, 2001.  It is undisputed that no overtime was worked on the date in question, and that all casuals and PTFs who worked that day were on straight time.  Accordingly, neither Wasden nor Preston was contractuallly entitled to work overtime that day, which was a nonscheduled day for both employees.  The grievance must be denied.   ....................

AWARD:   For the reasons discussed above, and based on the record as a whole, I find that the Postal Service did not violate Article 8.5 of the National Agreement and/or Article 8.3 of the Local Memorandum of Understanding when it did not utilize Mail Handlers Wasden and/or Preston for overtime on April 7, 2001.  Accordingly, the grievance is hereby denied in its entirely.