Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROLD ADJUSTTE2IT BOARD Award No. 8144
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8038
 2-WP-CM-'79



Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)

Dispute: Claim of Employes:




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.

Claimant J. Chrisman, a carman, reported for an eye glass fitting for safety glasses on his rest day. He cane in for this fitting in response to a notice posted by carrier. Notice reads as follows:
                                Sept. 2, 1977


        Safety Glasses


        On Sept. 7 at 10 a.m. there will be an eye doctor here to fit eye glasses to every one who has not got theirs.


        Everyone in the diesel and car departments will b e required to have them. One hour will be paid to the afternoon and midnight shift to have theirs fitted. Also men on their days off.


                                B. L. Coggin,

                                Car Foreman

                                R. L. Sheoard,

                                Diesel Foreman"

Form 1 Award No. 814+
 page 2 Docket No. 8038
 2-Urn-CM-79

 Claimant interpreted this bulletin as an order to report on his rest day for the examination. He reported as ordered and subsequently submitted a time claim for four hours at straight time rates. He cited as authority for this claim Rule 7C, which reads: "Itiployees called or required to report fox work and reporting but not used, will be paid a minimum of four hours at straight time rates."

 Carrier denied the claim, arguing that Rule 7C does not apply in this instance. Claimant was not called to perform, any work as required in Rule 7C.

 The question to be answered by this Board is whether claimant, by appearing on his rest day for an eye exam4.nation in response to carrier's posted notice, was called or required to resort to work as that language is traditionally applied.

 With few exceptions, it is well settled in the railroad industry that any activity occurri ng da.rin ; time in irhich the employee is directed. by the carrier must be considered T,rorlr- or service. TTjo universally accepted exceptions enunciated by this Board. ire =-,croup, awards are time spent for the primary benefit of .he employee and time uhen mutuality of interest exist (the so-called benefit theory).

 In the instant case, both of these exceptions apply. The fitting of safety glasses must be considered a definite benefit to employees. -urther, it is of benefit to bo~.h the Carrier and the employee. Employes are protected from, eye injuries and the pos s~i1wle loss of sight; carrier is protected from lost t:iune resulting fro:, em pl ogee injuries, as well as possible law suits when employees are injured on the job.

 Further, this Board has issued awards that have defined work to be compensated under such pay rules as Rule 7C as work usually and traditionally performed by the craft, of which the emloyee is a member. Reporting for eye glasses to be fitted is not included in Rule 1-12, which delineates duties and responsibilities of canmen. Absent contract language on the issue, this division's previous awards on the subject must prevail.

                      A W A R D


Claim denied. Claimant, however, should receive one hour of reporting pay, if it has not already been paid.

    NATIO1TAL Rt1ILROAD JA.DJUSTPEIiT BQARD By Order of Second Division Attest: Executive Secretary

      . National Railroad Aduustment Board%


By .`,~r'.~-fz.~.,.--..._ y= . ',,--~h ..a:~--t..' Y°°.~-
..~ )~osemarie Brasch - i~d;;rinistrativeassistant
 I
 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 24th day of October, 1979.