NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-22533
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES TO DISPUTE;
(Union Pacific Railroad Company
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claims of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Union Pacific Railroad Company:
Claim No. 1: (Carrier's file: 013-220-13)
Claim on behalf of the following signal gang employes for additional
compensation, and the difference between the expense payment actually allowed
each claimant and the allowable auto mileage, when their outfit cars were
moved from Provo, Utah, to Boardman, Oregon, April 7 - 12, 1977;
C. G. Barnes, K. Wimmer, D. Barnes, F. Kelsey and
R. D. Hardy; 8 hours each for each day April 7, 8,
and 9; 6 hours April 10; 2 hours April 12 -- 1977.
G. L. Potter and G. H. Hales: 8 hours each for
April 10, 1977.
Claim No. 2: (Carrier's file- 013-220-13)
Claim on behalf of the following signal gang employes for additional
compensation and expenses for the period their outfit cars were moved from
Kennewick, Washington, to Caliente, Nevada, May 26 - June 2, 1977;
D. R. Hardy, F. Kelsey, C. G. Barnes; 8 hours each for
each day May 28 & 29, plus per diem for those two days.
Bruce Brown: 8 hours for May 28 & 29, per diem fqr·those
2 days, plus 1100 miles at current rate per mile.
G. H. Hales, G. L. Potter; 8 hours each for May 29, and
per diem for May 28 & 29.
In addition, the members of this gang drove their automobiles from
Kennewick to Caliente and should be compensated for auto mileage as provided
for in Section 11 of the Memorandum of Agreement dated November 8, 1972,
less air fare from origin of flight to destination which the carritrt paid."
Award Number 22848 Page 2
Docket Number SG-22533
OPINION OF BOARD: We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence developed by
both parties, and the arguments developed in connection
therewith, and are unable to conclusively determine whether a violation of
any of the agreements occurred. While, it appears the Claimants herein
have been compensated for travel time, and expenses, in conformance with
existing agreement provisions, we can see a possibility that in certain
situations, certain of the Claimants may be entitled to additional compen
sation under agreement provisions.
Under the facts and circumstances of this case, we are remanding
this case to the parties to again review the evidence and the agreements
to determine what, if any, additional compensation may be due any of the
Claimants. If the parties are unable to do so within ninety (90) days
from the date of this award, they will so advise this Board, and we will
make an award based on the record before us.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record
and all the evidence, finds and 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
That the claim should be remanded.
A W A R D
Claim remanded.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
Executive
P&wto~
I I
Secretary
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of Nay 1980. `'.