CASE N0. 27
SSW FILE 47-366-3
SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT N0. 353
PARTIES) Transportation-Communication Employees Union
TO )
DISPUTE) St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company
STATEMENT OF
CLAIM:
Claim of the General Committee of the TransportationCommunication Employees Union on the St. Louis Southwestern Railway
Lines, that:
1. Carrier violated the agreement between the parties when
it refused to compensate regularly assigned relief telegrapher
P. R. Dafft, Plano, Texas, for expenses incurred while traveling
in the service of the Carrier during the month of June, 1964.
2. Carrier shall compensate claimant P. R. Dafft for 120
miles at 9.5G per mile, plus $1.25 for meal - total $12.65.
OPINION OF BOARD:
Claimant was regularly assigned Relief-Telegrapher with headquarters at Plano, Texas, assigned as follows:
Sat. Agent-Telegrapher. 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Plano, Tex.
Sun. & Mon. Agent-Telegrapher 4:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M. Addison, Tex.
(one hour for lunch)
Tue. & Wed. Clerk-Telegrapher 6:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M. Plano, Tex.
Thur.& Fri. Assigned Rest days
Carrier paid Claimant automobile mileage for traveling
between Plano and Addison. Claimant lived in Dallas and returned
to his home each night. He was not allowed mileage between his home
and his work locations
On Friday, June 19, 1964, Claimant was required to work his
rest day and relieve the Agent-Telegrapher at Plano. Claimant drove
to Plano, worked the assignment June 19th and drove back to his
home the same evening. On his June expense account Claimant
- 2 - AWARD NO. 24
claimed round trip mileage from Dallas to Plano on June 19, plus
$1.25 for meals. This expense claim was denied by Carrier.
In his letter of October 6, 1964, the General Chairman
stated:
"It is our position that on claimant's assigned rest day,
he is assigned to a day of rest and if he is taken off
his assigned rest day to perform work, then he is performing work under Article 16 of the Agreement.
"The headquarters of the regular relief positions were
designated by the Carrier for the purpose of applying
Article 15 of the Agreement and for this reason only.
The headquarters of the assignment has nothing to do
with the amount or rate of compensation due claimant
under the circumstances."
Article 16 reads:
'16-1. A regularly assigned employe who is taken off
his
assignment to
perform relief or emergency work at
an office or station other than the one to which assigned will be compensated at the rate of time and onehalf the straight-time rate of the position filled, and
shall be paid actual necessary expenses while away from
his home station. .
"16-2. A regularly assigned employee used to perform
relief or emergency work in the office to which assigned
will be paid the rate of the position worked or the
rate of the position to which regularly assigned, whichever is the greater, and will be paid at the rate of time
and one-half only for the hours worked outside of his
regularly assigned hours, or for the time worked
iri
excess
of eight hours on any day."
We do not believe the Claimant was performing work under
Article 16 of the agreement. The Employes admit that Plano was
Claimant's headquarters. Claimant was entitled to mileage when required to work away from his headquarters but Carrier cannot be required to pay mileage because an employe chooses to live at a location other than his headquarters town.'
r:
'°J \
t'
·1`~ a
"~.",~ - t
It I
T
L::,
S
· S 6A
35 3
In the instant case the Claimant was merely working overtime at his assigned work location.
FINDINGS: That the agreement was not violated.
AWARD: Claim denied.
Don J. Harri
Chairman
,l-O
°V
nl
D. A. Bobo, Employee Member M. L. Erwin, Carrier Member
Tyler, Texas
December 28, 1966