So far, we have developed that Mr. Waring held a seniority date as signalman and signal maintainer as of July 26, 1,937; that this date was in conformity with the agreement between the Railway Company and the Signalmen's Organization dated January 17, 1936; that on March 11, 1942 when bulletin No. 266 was issued he was by virtue of his seniority holding a position of signalman, this being his assignment in conformity with schedule rules. This leaves for consideration the question of application of Rule 19 of the Signalmen's Agreement, which provides that employes sent away front home station to perform work will be allowed necessary expenses except when sent to temporarily relieve an employe of a higher class.

Mr. Waring is basing his claim on a contention that his regular assignment was that of assistant signal maintainer at Yakima and that because he was working as a signalman he is entitled to expenses under the provisions of Rule 19 while working as a signalman. This position is obviously not tenable for the reason that Mr. Waring's regular assignment which he was holding on the basis of his seniority was that of a signalman and under the agreed to interpretations of the rules it would have been improper to have permitted Mr. Waring to take service as an assistant signal maintainer when his seniority entitled him to work as a signalman or a signal maintainer. It cannot, therefore, be said that Mr. Waring is, under the provisions of Rule 19, entitled to expenses while working as a signalman because when so working he was properly performing service in conformity with his seniority under the provisions of the agreement. To say that Mr. Waring's assignment was that of an assistant signal maintainer at Yakima and that he was temporarily working as a signalman is in conflict with the provisions of schedule rules and not in conformity with the facts.

Assuming, however, purely for the sake of argument that Mr. Waring was assigned to the position of assistant signal maintainer at Yakima and was temporarily relieving on a signalman's position, in that case he would not be entitled to expenses under the provisions of Rule 19 as on the employes' own line of argument he would then be temporarily relieving an employe in a higher class. In other words, following the employes' argument to its logical conclusion, if Mr. Waring's assignment was that of assistant signal maintainer at Yakima he must necessarily have been temporarily used in the position of Signalman after he had been assigned to the assistant signal maintainer's position at Yakima, in which event he would not be entitled to expenses under the provisions of Rule 19 as he would then be temporarily filling a position in a higher class. On the other hand, if Mr. Waring's proper assignment was that of signalman, and it is the Carrier's position for the reasons hereinabove stated that such was the case, then he would not be entitled to expenses while occupying that regular assignment. In any view of the case, therefore, i. e., whether Mr. Waring was temporarily filling a position in a higher class or was filling the position of a signalman on the basis of his seniority, he would not be entitled to expenses under the provisions of Rule 19.

The facts disclose that while holding a temporary position as signalman, C. B. Waring bid in and was assigned to the permanent position of Assistant Signal Maintainer at Yakima. However, Mr. Waring was retained on his temporary position as signalman against his request to be transferred to the Yakima position, and has filed this claim under Rule 19, for expenses while held to his position as signalman.

The reason advanced by the Carrier for not transferring Mr. Waring to Yakima is that the assignment to Yakima was made for the purpose of providing Mr. Waring with a position upon the completion of his temporary work

as a Signalman. But there is nothing in the rules that authorizes the Carrier to indefinitely delay a transfer after making an assignment to a position. Implicit in the rules, especially Rule 42, is the requirement that transfer shall be made within a reasonable time after assignment. Award 2263. We agree with the employes that this requirement cannot be set aside by the Carrier against the expressed desire of the employe who has received the assignment.

The Carrier contends that Mr. Waring, having acquired seniority as a Signalman, and holding a position of Signalman even though such position was only emporary, could not exercise his seniority as an Assistant Signal Maintainer. This contention is quite effectively refuted by the fact that Carrier assigned Mr. Waring to the position of Assistant Signal Maintainer with full knowledge of all the facts. The same reply is applicable to Carrier's contention regarding Rule 3 (c).

The Carrier further contends that Mr. Waring while filling the position of Signalman, after being assigned to Yakima, was within the meaning of that part of Rule 19 which denies expenses to an employe "when sent to temporarily relieve an employe of a higher class." The whole record refutes this contention. Mr. Waring was relieving no one; he was simply performing work other than the work at Yakima, to which he had been assigned.

We are of the opinion that after Mr. Waring was assigned to Yakima this became his home station within the meaning of Rule 19. When the Carrier, contrary to Mr. Waring's request, required that he remain at the signalman's work he was entitled to his necessary expenses as provided in the Rule.

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

That the carrier and the employe involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

That Claimant is entitled to his necessary expense incurred while held in the Signalman's position after assignment to Yakima.

AWARD