NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-22674
John J. Mangan, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
(Chicago and North Western Transportation Company
STATEMENT OF CIAIM:. "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Chicago and North Western
Transportation Company;
(a) ,Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly Rule's 6 and 13 of the Chicago
Railway Agreement, when Carrier Headquartered Crew No. 2 at Altoona,
Wisconsin and not at St. Paul.
(b) Carrier should at this time re-bulletin Crew No. 2 with
designated Headquarters at St. Paul, Minn.
(c) Carrier at this time should also re-imburse members of
Crew No. 2 their expenses which they had reported to the Carrier for the
period from June 24, 1977 to July 23, 1977, and any future expenses they
file, while working on crew #2.
This claim is on behalf of Mr. C. R Lagerstrom, G. B. Polls,
R G. Carlton, R. A. Timm and L. A. Anger, member's of Crew #2, and also
for employe's who may work on this crew in the future."
LCarrier's file: 79-19-2J
OPINION OF BOARD; The Carrier advertised in a bulletin, dated June 9, 1977,
requesting bids for positions to be established on a
signal gang headquartered at Altoona, Wisconsin. The Bulletin also referred
to the workers as a "Crew".
Claimants C. R. Lagerstrom, C. B. Polls, R. A. Timm, R. G. Carlton
and L. A. Anger bid for the jobs and were so assigned. Most of the work
was performed at Altoona, but part of it was performed at Eau Claire
about three miles from Altoona. The men did not return to their own
individual homes nightly. They ate their meals in Altoona and lodged there.
On August 11, 1977 claims were submitted on behalf of members of
Crew #2 for the payment of lodging and meal expenses.
Award Number 22725 Page 2
The parties rely on Rules 6 and 13 of the former Chicago, St. Paul,
Minneapolis and Omaha contract effective October 1, 1953 for their respective
positions:
"6. An employe's time will begin and end at a designated.
point at home station.
The designated headquarters of employes will be the
home station, except employes in crews assigned to road
service whose headquarters will be St. Paul.
Sleeping and/or boarding cars or stations at which
expense for lodging is allowed will be the home station
as referred to in this agreement for employes assigned
to such cars, for employes who perform road service and
who do not return to headquarters daily, and for employes
who have no other assigned home station."
"13. Hourly rated employes performing road service (crews)
who do not return to headquarters daily, but who leave and
return to home station daily (see Rule 6), will be paid on
the following basis:
If sleeping and/or boarding accommodations are not
furnished actual expenses will be allowed when away from
headquarters."
The Organization's position may be stated as follows:
The claimants were members of Crew No. 2; that the term "crews
assigned to road service" was applied to all employes working on projects
away from their home station so that they could not return nightly;
that such crews had been established with headquarters at St. Paul in the
past; and that this was the first time the Carrier had bulletined such a
signal crew with a headquarters other than at St. Paul. Furthermore, the
Organization contends that the .foreman, L. A. Anger, was allowed expenses
for meals and lodging and the other members of the crew are entitled to
the same consideration by the Carrier under the Rule. The Organization
also contends that the asserted violation was a continuing one and it was
not necessary to file more than one claim.
Award Number 22725 Page 3
Docket Number SG-22674
Carrier denied the claim on the grounds that meal and lodging
expenses were payable only to gangs assigned in road service under Rule 6;
that claimants were headquartered by bulletin assignment at Altoona,
Wisconsin and were not assigned in road service; that road service meant
that the crew traveled from point to point in the performance of its work;
and that the crew was established and specifically assigned to a "singlepoint job."
Furthermore, if the members of the crew did not wish to work
without being reimbursed for expenses, they could bid off the job; that
R. G. Carlton should not be allowed expenses for the period June 24th to
July 23rd and November 24th to December 23rd, because these claims were
never presented locally; in addition, his claims for July 24th to
September 23rd were presented for meals only; that the claims for lodging
expenses should be denied because they were never presented locally.
The Carrier also objected to the claims of C. R. Iagerstrom, June 24th to
July 23rd, and G. B. Polls, September 24th to October 23rd, because they
were never presented locally.
The project was completed and the crew was abolished on December 16,
1977.
Thus the disposition of this claim rests upon the interpretation
to be given the term "road service."
This Board finds that the Record discloses that it is not the
title of the project that determines "road service"; it is evident by the
parties' past conduct.
On the record before us it is unrefuted that on at least two prior
occasions, crews were established for special projects, were headquartered
at St. Paul and were compensated necessary expenses. Thus the distinction,
asserted here, between road crews and non-road crews, seems not to have been
applied in practice.
Under these circumstances, the claimants who worked on the assignment and properly filed clai
lodging.
The violation of the Agreement by the Carrier in refusing to pay
the claimants was a continuing one, therefore, it was only necessary for
the claimants to file one claim for their expenses during the period involved.
Award Number 22725 Page 4
Docket Number SG-22674
The Carrier has the right to determine whether the expenses are
reasonable and accurate. This could only be accomplished by periodic
filing of the expenses on the property as the project progressed.
The
Record is
not clear as to what expenses were filed, by the
members of the crew, with the Carrier.
Any expenses not properly filed and supported by agreement are
denied.
The amounts to be paid to the claimants shall be limited to
amounts for which they have not already been reimbursed.
The assignment was abolished in December, 1977, therefore
paragraph (b) of the claim is dismissed.
FnMINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
record and all the evidence, finds sad holds:
That the parties waived oral hearing;
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;
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over
the dispute involved herein; and
The Agreement was violated.
A W A R D
Claim sustained to the extent indicated in the Opinion.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
I/~/GI/. Tj
Executive Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of January 1980. -..