(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way FLiployes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

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

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it refused to allow Trackman Dewey Edens pay for time expended and mileage expense incurred for carrying out the Carrier's instructions on January 9, 1978 (System File C-4 (17-31-42)-D?3/12-36 (78-23) J).

 (2) Tradmoe.n Dewey Edens be allowed seven (7) hours and forty-nine (49) minutes of pay at his straight-time rate, one and one-half hours of pay at his time and one-half rate and mileage allowance of $7.84 (56 files @ 14¢ per mile) because of the violation referred to in Part (1) hereof."

 OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimant was regularly assigned as Trackman., 7:30 a.m*
 until 4:00 p.m., with one-half hour for lunch, Monday through Friday.

 On January 6, 1978, the Employs became ill, to the point that he left work to seek medical attention, and he states that he was instructed to report to the hospital for laboratory tests on the next Monday at 7:00 a.m.

 At 6:00 s.m. on that Monday (January 9, 1978), the Claimant advised the Foreman of the 7:00 a.m. appointment; stating that he would be late in reporting for work. The F arrangement would be satisfactory. The Claimant reported to work at 8:20 a.m.,, but he was told that he would have to travel 26 miles to the office of the Roadmaster. The Employe c the Roadmaster would not be in the office until 5:30 p.m. He remained there until 5:30, at which time he spoke with the Roadmaster. The Employs received no compensation for January 9.



When the Employe reported for duty at 8:20 a.m.., he was instructed to report to the Roadmaster, sad thus the Organization urges that his time started as of
                  Docket Number MW-23107


13:20 and ended when he returned following his conference with the Roadmaster, which results in certain straight time and overtime service, in addition to mileage expense. '

 Although the record discusses the events of January 6 and 9, the . claim presented here speaks only is terms of compensation for January 9.

 Initially, we state that in most instances rhea a Carrier requires an employs to perform certain service or to do an act, the terrier is obligated to compensate the employs for the time involved. In this case, the Carrier insists that the events leading up to this case may not be viewed in the void, but moat be considered in light of this Employe's record. It asserts that this Haploye has had a history of leaving work prior to the completion of his day of em Roadmaster to want to know the nature of the illness in order to decide if any further medical attention was necessary by the Company physician.

 Further, the Company insists that the Claimant did not seek permission to be off on January 9; but rather, stated to the Foreman that he would be late.

 While we do not depart from our stated general rule, this case must be considered based upon its own merits, and we are unable to find that the Carrier was unreasonable is this particular case. Certainly, if the Roadmaster made himself unre suffered a deprivation of rages, the result might be different; and, of course, if the record indicated that the (terrier's action was is the form of a discipline, then othe However, based upon all of the facts and circumstances, we find nothing in the record to suggest to us that the (terrier was unreasonable in this particular case, and user ell of the circumstances, we rill deny the claim.

        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;


teat the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and FSaployes within the meaning of the Railway labor Act, as approved June 21, 193;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has ,jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

                                                            L_

              _ Award, Number 23309 Page 3 .

              Docket Numbers MW-23107


        That the Agreement was not violated.


                        A W A R D


        Claim-denied.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUS24ENT BOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~I~
 Egecutive Secretary

 Dated at Chicago., Illinois., this 29th day of May 1981.