The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in ad
dition Referee Dudley E. Whiting when the award was rendered.
DISPUTE: CLAIM OF EMPLOYES: 1. That the Carrier has declined to properly compensate Car Inspector J. H. Clements of Pine Bluff, Arkansas for his actual expenses during the filling of a temporary assignment at North Little Rock, Arkansas beginning with April 2nd through the 14th, 1954, under the current agreement.
2. That accordingly the Carrier be ordered to additionally compensate this employe for filling the aforesaid assignment in the amount of:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On February 10, 1954, temporary promoted Car Inspector J. H. Clements, and hereinafter referred to as the claimant, was furloughed at his home point, Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Effective April 3, Car Inspector A. L. Gaddy, employed at North Little Rock, Arkansas, was scheduled to begin his annual vacation of ten days. A short time prior to April 3, arrangements were made between the general chairman and Master Mechanic W. A. Brule, Jr. to send claimant to North Little Rock to fill the job; he was notified and reported at that point on the night of April 2, in order to work the first shift of the job which began at 5:00 A. M., April 3. While working this assignment, claimant worked the rest day of April 8, filling job of Car Inspector Fassler who was off duty on that date.
When claimant's relief assignment concluded on April 14, he turned his receipts and itemized expenses in to Relief Foreman Mr. H. W. Wood, who had previously indicated he would fill out Form 3774 for him and turn it in for payment. However, Mr. Wood left a note for claimant advising that it was his understanding that he was to fill the ass bgnment at his own expense, and suggested that he handle the matter with his general chairman. Upon returning to his home point, claimant then filled out the 3774 Form, which General [6867 2519-6 691
Unquestionably they recognized that Rule 10 is not applicable to furloughed employes used in relief of regular assigned employes on vacation.
Referee Morse's interpretation of Article 12(a) of the Vacation Agreement does not provide that employes used for vacation relief will receive benefits in excess of those due them for relief provided for other purposes, under provisions of regular relief rules. On basis of past practice of many years and the clear and unambiguous wording of Rule 10, furloughed employes are not eligible for and have not been allowed expenses and/or travel time when used to fill vacancies for any purpose. Consequently, the claimant in this dispute has been properly compensated under the applicable rules of the schedule agreement and the Vacation Agreement of December 17, 1941 and amendments thereto.
It is clear the claim is not supported by the rules or past practice and the carrier respectfully submits that the claim should be denied.
FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
Disposition of this case is governed by our Award No. 2518. (Docket 2257).