The facts in this case are not disputed. The Claimants were members of Mobile Construction Crew 26044. The headquarters point established for this crew was Wichita Falls, Texas. The Claimants were provided lodging at Vernon, Texas. They elected not to accept the Carrier's lodging, but instead traveled to and from their place of residence, a distance of about 77 miles. From October i through November 1, 2001 the Claimants submitted for breakfast and dinner meal expenses.
This is a contract interpretation case involving Part 1 of Rule 46(D) of the Agreement, which reads as follows:
The Carrier denied the claim as these were not "necessary actual expenses." It maintained that for the expense to be reimbursed, it must be both an actual expense and a necessary expense. The Carrier argues that electing to commute to and from their homes negated the necessity for the expenses.
The Organization argues that Rule 46 is a mobile crew Rule requiring pay for all meal and lodging expenses. It points to Rule 47 (A) that ". . . employees shall not be reimbursed for costs of meals and lodging at headquarters point." It argues that Rule 46, supra, requires payment when members of a mobile crew are "working away from their homes" as was the case at bar. The fact that the Claimants refused to accept lodging is irrelevant to meal expenses. The Claimants traveled to and from their homes to their work areas and they were due expenses for meals. The Organization maintains that such payments have been historically and traditionally paid.
The Board carefully reviewed the facts of this case. The language of the Rule is clear and unambiguous. The phrase "working away from their homes" does not refer, as the Organization argues, to the Claimants' homes. To work away from Form 1 Award No. 37878
home refers to an employment situation wherein the employee is forced by job requirements to sleep at a location "away from their homes."
The disputed Rule is clear and unambiguous. There is insufficient evidence of record to persuasively support a past practice and overcome the clear language of the Rule. The Claimants were working near their homes and elected to return to their homes. This is not a condition requisite for "necessary actual expenses" for meals. The claim must be denied.
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.