STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company:
On behalf of E. E. Higginbotham and H. Adams for mileage allowances of $42.66 and $37.26, respectively, for travel between their homes and work sites on certain weekends during August, 1969, account no free transportation furnished by Carrier under Rule 23(a) of the Signalmen's Agreement. (Carrier's File: 15-23)
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: In view of the merger of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company into Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, the Carrier and the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen negotiated an agreement covering signal employes of the merged company who are represented by the Brotherhood. That agree ment bears an effective date of July 1, 1967, date of the merger, which is by reference thereto made a part of the record in this dispute.
Rule 23 (a) is the basis on which the instant claim is before the Board and for ready reference Rule 23 is quoted:
(a) Employes assigned to signal gangs in camp cars will be allowed to make weekend trips to their homes except in cases of emergency. Free transportation will be furnished over company lines. Any time lost on this account will not be paid for but may be worked at the option of a majority of the employes of the gang outside of regular hours on other days at straight time fur the hours so worked.
(b) If for any reason the employes are not released after completing their regular assigned work week and not permitted to make weekend trips to their homes they will be paid not less titan eight hours at the proper overtime rate for being available for service on the sixth day of the week during the hours of their assignment on regular work days, whether they are worked or not; however, if worked during the stated eight-hour period they will not receive additional compensation. If not released by the end of the hours worked
It is our opinion and contention that, Carrier has violated the working agreement, rule #23 (a), by not providing free transportation for Mr. Adams and Mr. Higginbotham to report to work and return home.
We, therefore, respectfully request that these expense claims of $37.26 in favor of Mr. Adams and $42.66 in favor of Mr. Higginbotham, be paid accordingly."
"Yours of December 2nd appealing decision of Mr. J. R. DePriest, Superintendent Communications & Signals, in claim in behalf of Signalmen E. E. Higginbotham and H. Adams for mileage allowance shown on Form 322 for month of August, 1969, covering trips between their homes and work points on certain weekends.
I fully agree with Mr. DePriest's decision in this case. There is no basis whatever for the mileage allowances claimed under Rule 23 (a) or otherwise, and the claim submitted by them is accordingly declined.
I would also point out that the Forms 322 referred to were not properly prepared. They were both prepared by Mr. Higginbotham who also signed Mr. Adams' name in the signature space. The date of August 6th is shown for traveling from their homes to Stovall and August 10th in traveling from Stovall to their homes, which obviously could not be correct. Therefore, the claim could not be classified as being properly filed."
OPINION OF BOARD: Similar claims submitted to this Board in the past have been consistently denied. See Awards 12351, 18304, 18152 and 16745. There is no reason for reaching a different conclusion herein. The claim will be denied.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;