Gene T. Ritter, Referee


            (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

                          (Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Company


            STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:


            (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it required Paul Clark, G. D. Clarke, Craig Miller, D. D, Hollingsworth, Jim Gassman, D, L, Valenta, D. J, Headrick and M. G. Humphrey to furnish their own transportation to and from the work site on and subsequent to Jime 29, 1970 and refused to reimburse them for the cost thereof (System File CP.caC-E-570).


            (2) The Carrier further violated the Agreement when it refused to compensate the above-named employes for the time consumed in going to and from the work site on and subsequent to June 29, 1970 during overtime hours.


            (3) Each of the above-named employee be allowed one hour of pay at time and one-half and mileage for each work day within the period encompassed in this claim for totals of:


            CLAIMANT NUMBER NUMBER CENTS

            OF DAYS OF MILES PER MILE

            Paul Clark 42 24 7

            D. Hollingsworth 50 240 7

            G. Clarke 67 990 7

            M. Humphrey 66 990 7

            Jim Gassman 45 240 7

            Craig Miller 62 990 7

            D, Headrick 24 240 7

            D. Valenta 38 240 7


            OPINION OF BOARD: This dispute involves a claim for reimbursement of travel

            expense and overtime payment for time consumed in traveling to and from the site of Claimants' work location. The Organization contends that under the provisions of Rule 22, Claimants were entitled to compensation at their time and one-half rate for the time expended (1 hour each day) going to and from the work site; that under the provisions of Rule 32, Claimants are entitled to be reimbursed for necessary expenses incurred while traveling to and from their work site; and that under Rule 27, Claimants' work day, as well as their time, starts and ends at the tool house at Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The Organization further contends that the Cedar R


. . :._
                    Award Number 19710 Page 2

                    Docket Number MW-19544


Arnold Energy Center Track in the vicinity of Palo, Iowa, which is 15 miles from Claimants' assigned headquarters at Cedar Rapids, and that Claimants were instructed and required to drive their private automobiles to and from the work site and to start and end their work day at said work site. In response to this claim, Carrier contends that the involved work was not covered by the Agreement between Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Company and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee for the reason that the involved track upon which the work was performed was not connected to the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Company Line and that the nearest point is same 10 miles distance therefrom; that Carrier maintained tool boxes at the job site, as well as toilet facilities, that should be considered as a tool house, outfit car or shop, as found in Rule 27; that Claimants were college students hired solely for the. particular job who had not acquired union seniority; and that the student employee were advised at the time of their hiring that the Palo track would be their reporting point and that there was company transportation available each and every da
The record discloses that the involved track upon which the work in dispute was performed was not connected to the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Rail Company Line, the nearest point being some 10 miles distance therefrom. Therefore, the involved work was not performed for the benefit of the Carrier in this dlsp· , but was completed under a contract with Iowa Electric Light & Power Company. Th,.:e fare, the involved work was not subject to the Agreement between the Carrier involved in this disput No. 10932 (Miller).

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whale record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes 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 the Agreement was not violated.


      I

·.:'=
                    Award Number 19710 Page 3

                    Docket Number MW-19544

                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:~r~~LL~
 Executive Secretary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of April 1973.