RATIONAL RAILROAD ADJASTKENT HOARD
THIRD DIVISION Docket Number SG-23197
George S. Roukis, Referee
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES
TO
DISPUTE:
(Southern Railway Oompeury
STATBdRT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the Southern Railway 0=4any et al:
Claim on behalf of T. D. Sandlin for meal expense above the $9.00
limit carrier placed on daily meal allowance."
(General Chairman file: SR-79) (Carrier file: SG-355)
OPINION OF BOARD: In this dispute Claimant contends that the $9.00 per
day limit placed on meals by Carrier is unreasonable and
violative of Rule 41. He argues that Rule 41 provides that gang amployes
will be allowed their actual necessary expenses when they do not return to
the camp cars for meals. Contrary to Carrier's position that Arbitration
Board No. 298 is applicable herein, Claimant asserts that Rule 41 predates
this Award.
In our review of this case, we agree with Carrier's Position. Our
decision is predicated upon our recent determination in Third Division Award
23190. In that Award involving the same Organization and the same issue, we
held in pertinent part that:
"Although the Employes urge that there was not
such agreement, we find no specific evidence to
substantiate that urging and, in fact, there is
certain evidence to the contrary, such as the
wording of Question 21, as submitted to Board 298
for interpretation.
Finally, we have noted the decision in
Public Law Board No. 2004. It is not incuriDent upon us to base our determination
on the decision which we might have rendered
had we heard that case in the first instance.
The fact remains that it has a precedential
value here, absent a determination that it
is palpably erroneous. We are unable to
reach such a determination and, thus, we do
not find that the Eaployes have submitted a
sufficient shoving to compel us to find that
the applicable provisions of Board 298 do not
apply in this instance. Such being the case,
Award Nunber 23274 Page 2
Docket Number SG-23197
"we are unable to find a showing that
any rule has been violated in this
instance, and we will dismiss the
claim."
We find this holding directly on point with the facts of this case. We
will deny the claim.
P33DINGS: The Thud Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thers0n, and
upon the whole record and all the evidence, rinds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Daployes involved in this dispute are
respectively Carrier and Ertployes 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.
A W A R D
Claim denied.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTUM BOARD
By Order of Third Division
ATTEST:
am- eg,!Att~
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of April 1981.