' 2-P&LE-E W-'61





The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in

addition Referee Howard Johnson when the award was rendered.


PARTIES TO DISPUTE

SYSTEM FEDERATION NO. 103, RAILWAY EMPLOYES'

DEPARTMENT, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.

(ELECTRICAL WORKERS)


THE PITTSBURGH & LAKE ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY







EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: Electrician 0. Zimmerman and the seven other electrical workers involved in the claim are regularly assigned to shop, construction and general electrical work, with headquarters at McKees Rocks, Pa., and with bulletined hours of 7:40 A. M. to 12:00 noon, 12:30 to 4:10 P. M.

On December 14, 1956, Electrician 0. Zimmerman and 7 other electrical workers were ordered to report to Youngstown, Ohio, Monday, December 17,


3 647-10 549

The first paragraph of Rule 7 (a) sets forth the minimum time to be paid an employe who continues working beyond his regular working hours. (Rules 6, 10 and 14 provide for overtime payment otherwise).


The second paragraph of Rule 7 (a) provides a lunch period for an employe who continues to work beyond his regular work hours.




Section (d) of Rule 7 applies to employes working in advance of regular hours.




It is obvious from the foregoing that none of the paragraphs of Rule 7 are applicable to the claimants in the instant dispute; therefore the employes' contention that Rule 7 is applicable is without merit.




The carrier respectfully submits that the meals and sleeping accommodations furnished by the carrier at its expense to the claimants properly met the requirements of Rule 14. Further, on each and every date that the claimants were relieved from duty for more than 5 hours, their continuity of service was broken under the provisions of Rule 14. They were also under pay during the time they were traveling between McKees Rocks and East Youngstown each week end.


The claimants were properly compensated in accordance with Rule 14 of the agreement. The claim is without merit and should be denied.


FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, based 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.




Claimants were regularly assigned to shop, construction and general electrical work, with headquarters at McKees Rocks, Pa., and were members of the Carrier's only gang used for construction or heavy repair work on the entire railroad. Electrical workers' seniority is system-wide.


When the new electric control system was planned for East Youngstown, about sixty miles from McKees Rocks, the Carrier discussed the project with Organization representatives and proposed the establishment of new positions for electrical workers with headquarters at Youngstown. But the Organization contended that since this road construction gang with headquarters at McKees Rocks had always been assigned to work at other points they should be given this new work at Youngstown. Consequently the Carrier issued instructions to eleven men, later reduced to the eight claimants, to report at Youngstown at a definite date

3647-11 550


The claimants were taken to and from Youngstown at the beginning and end of each work week by motor vehicle or passenger train on Carrier's time at pro rata or overtime rate', whichever was applicable, work normal hours, with some overtime, and at their request received board and room at a motel at Carrier's expense, rather than at the Y.M.C.A., all in accordance with its order and with Rule 14, which provides as follows:






The Employes' position is that neither Rule 14 nor any other road work rule is applicable; that the Carrier's action in requiring the claimants to remain in Youngstown during the construction of the new facility in effect required them to perform continuous service during the entire periods away from home; that Rule 7 covers "payment for overtime not otherwise specified and provides a convenient method of determining the value of the service rendered by the employes here involved". Rule 7 is as follows:




3647-12 551






The Employes' contention is that Rule 14 is not applicable because it expressly relates only to "employes regularly assigned to road work whose tour of duty is regular," because claimants' electrical construction gang is assigned only occasionally as needed to perform electrical work on line of road, and such assignment cannot be construed as a regular tour of duty, since when not so assigned they regularly work as McKees Rocks; and that if Rule 14 were applicable, the Y.M.C.A. or a motel would not constitute a boarding car. However, they state, not only (1) that the Carrier should have transported the claimants back and forth each day if it wanted Rule 14 to apply, but also (2) that if a boarding car had been supplied the claim would not have arisen.


The carrier contends that Rule 7 was not applicable because claimants were relieved from duty each day on completion of their tour of duty and performed no service until their next tour of duty on another day; that Rule 14 has always been considered applicable to this situation; that such an instance was a turntable job so handled; that board and room at a Y.M.C.A., motel, or other facility at carrier's expense has always been considered a substitute for, and in fact preferable to, a boarding car; that it was impracticable to take claimants back and forth daily because the trip involved a minimum of two hours each way; and that if carrier had understood that Rule 14 were not considered applicable it would have established new positions at Youngstown for the work.


The final sentence of the first paragraph of Rule 14 expressly provides for payment of board and room by the carrier in lieu of a boarding car. For it provides for the payment of actual expenses "where meals and lodging are not provided by the company when away from home station," "a boarding car to be considered a home station." Thus, since claimants' actual home station was McKees Rocks, and no boarding car was made available to them

3647-13 552

at East Youngstown, they were certainly "away from home station," and their actual expenses for meals and lodging were accordingly allowed. While, as the Employees contend, Rule 14 does not by its terms strictly apply to employes other than those "regularly assigned to road work whose tour of duty is regular," it is logically applicable to this situation and seems therefore to have been followed in this instance and at least some others.


However, it is not necessary to hold expressly that it was applicable to this claim; for in any event the claimants were relieved from duty on completion of each daily tour of duty, performed no service until their next daily tour of duty, and were fully paid in compliance with Rule 7 for all service performed. Thus since admittedly no other road work rule is applicable if Rule 14 is not, no violation of the agreement has been shown.










Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18th day of January 1961.