Case No. 78


PARTIES Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 T_0 and
 DISPUTE: Burlington Northern Railroad-Co.
 STATEMENT "1. The Agreement was violated when Carrier
 OF CLAIM: failed and refused to allow mileage expense
 for members of Twin City's Regional Relay Gang
 No. 1 when it changed the work point of said
 Gang during the weekends of May 14 - 15 (from
 St. Cloud, Minnesota to Royalton, Minnesota)
 and May 21 - 22 (from Royalton, Minnesota to
 Tioga, North Dakota), 1983.
 2. As a consequence of the afore-mentioned
 violation, Claimants J. L. Plombon, M.
 Dockendorf, H. J. Hayenga, C. T. Ogg, J. M.
 Pa-tri and S. Smith shall each be allowed one
 hundred and eighteen dollars and twenty cents
 ($118.20) mileage expense."
 FINDINGS
 Upon the whole record, after hearing, the Board finds that the
 parties herein are Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the
 Railway Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board is duly
 constituted under Public Law 89-456 and has jurisdiction of the
 parties and the subject matter.

According to Petitioner, on both of the weekends in question, Claimants herein were informed of the relocation of the work point which was at some distance from their, St. Cloud outfit cars (21 miles on one weekend and 570 miles on the other). Therefore, according to Petitioner, it was necessary for, the Claimants to

2 utilize their personal vehicles to travel from their residence to


the new work pointson both weekends.

Carrier's version of the facts was substantially different. Carrier avers that on May 13, while the Gang was working at St. Cloud, the Claimants, as well as other members of the Gang, were informed that, on the following Monday, May 16, the Gang would commence working at Royalton. Further they were told that company transportation would be provided for employees to make the move both on Friday, as well as on the following Monday. Similarly, on the following weekend, on Friday, May 20, while the Gang was working at Royalton, they were again informed that on the following Monday they would move to a new location in North Dakota, approximately 570 miles away. Again, they were told that company transportation would be furnished both on that Friday, as well as on the following Monday and, also, that they would be welcome to ride a work train which would be travelling to the work site on the weekend. From Carrier's standpoint, there was no need for the Claimants or any other Carrier employees to use their own personal vehicles to make the trip, since company transportation was provided. Further, Carrier avers that other members of the Gang availed themselves of the company-furnished transportation to make the move but the six Claimants chose voluntarily to use their personal vehicles for the trips.


3~1~0 -7 8

3 The Board is unable to determine which version of the facts presented by the submissions of the parties is correct. It is apparent that, from the standpoint of policy and interpretation of the Agreement, the Board can only deal with the facts, as presented, in the light of- the contractual provisions. In this instance, there is a significant dispute with respect to -the facts. The Board is powerless to decide whether indeed there has or has not been a violation of the rules. The resolution of that factual dispute is beyond the jurisdication of this Board. For, that reason, the dispute must be dismissed.


AWARD
      Claim dismissed.


                  n

                  A

              't ___I__z~ ~,_ ______ _ __ _

                  h1 LIe


W. Hodynsl~,er Member F. H. Funk, Employee Member

 St. Paul, Minnesota
 Amt , 1988 ?

                                                3Lleo-~g