evidence before the Board, Decision No. 2 was made; and that no protest was made by the Abilene & Southern Railway or by anyone on its behalf, either before hearings commenced, during the hearings, or at any time prior to the publication of that decision.

Decision.-Petition of the Abilene & Southern Railway for the reopening of Decision No. 2 is therefore denied.

DECISION NO. 16.-DOCKET 45.

Chicago, Ill., November 5, 1920.

Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes v. Southern Pacific Co. (Pacific System).

Question.-Demotion of William Wallace from position of junior division clerk, after having been allowed 30 days in which to qualify, as provided in rule 10 of the agreement between the Director General of Railroads and the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes, account of alleged failure to qualify.

In the evidence it appears, without contradiction, that on April 13, 1920, William Wallace was granted his annual 12 days' vacation leave of absence; and that up to June 1, 1920, the date on which the joint statement covering the case was made, he had not reported for duty.

Rule 46 of the agreement between the Director General of Railroads and the Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes, reads:

An employee who fails to report for duty at the expiration of leave of absence shall be considered out of the service, except that where failure to report on time is the result of unavoidable delay, the leave will be extended to include such delay.

Decision.-Basing its finding on the rule above quoted, the Board decides that William Wallace has, by his own act, automatically separated himself from the service of the carrier.

DECISION NO. 17.-DOCKET 11.

Chicago, Ill., November 5, 1920.

Petition of the Order of Railroad Telegraphers for Rehearing on Decision No. 2.-Dockets 1, 2, and 3.

Question. Application of the Order of Railroad Telegraphers for a reopening of Decision No. 2, in so far as that decision passes upon the claims of the Order of Railroad Telegraphers.

Decision-The Board is not inclined to reopen a case after it has given a public hearing and published a decision thereon. The application is therefore denied.

DECISION NO. 18.-DOCKET 12.

Chicago, Ill., November 12, 1920.

Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.

Question.-Dismissal of J. M. Hamilton, Ravenna, Ky., account of abstracting from the superintendent's record room a certain paper,. a part of the records of the carrier.

Mr. Hamilton admits, in his own statement, the correctness of the charges made by the carrier.

Decision-Request for the reinstatement of J. M. Hamilton, with pay for time lost, is therefore denied.

DECISION NO. 19.-DOCKET 34.

Chicago, Ill., November 12, 1920.

Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes v. Southern Pacific Lines (Texas Lines).

Question.-Shall Charles Martin, clerk in Houston general shops of the Southern Pacific Lines, be paid for time lost due to sickness? The right of employees to pay for time lost on account of sickness is based entirely on what the practices were prior to Federal control. The existing agreement does not add anything to nor take anything from such past practices; it simply continues them.

The joint statement of facts in this case reads, in part:

Prior to period of Government control and operation, there was no fixed rule governing the allowance of time to employees at the Houston general shops on account of sickness, and such cases as arose were handled individually and referred to proper officials for decision.

In the contention of the employees the following statement appears:

We further contend that prior to Federal control it was the general practice to allow time as claimed, the management, of course, retaining the right not to pay in specific cases where the employee's merit was not sufficient that he be granted this.

The two statements taken together indicate, and, we believe, establish beyond question, that prior to Federal control it was not the general practice at the Houston general shops of the Southern Pacific Lines to pay employees for time lost during leave of absence due to

sickness.

Decision. It is the decision of the Board, in this case, that in the absence of a rule in the existing agreement relative to allowance of pay for time lost by a clerical employee of the Houston general shops of the Southern Pacific Lines, due to sickness, the carrier is to be the judge as to whether such allowance is to be made.

The request that Charles Martin be paid for time lost, due to sickness, is therefore denied.

DECISION NO. 20.-DOCKET 17.

Chicago, Ill., November 23, 1920.

Masters, Mates and Pilots of America (Local No. 40 of San Francisco); Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association (Local No. 35 of San Francisco); Ferry Boatmen's Union of California v. Northwestern Pacific Railroad Co.; Southern Pacific_Railroad Co.; Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway; Western Pacific Railroad Company.

This decision is upon a controversy or dispute between the organizations of employees and the carriers named above and is applicable to employees on railroad-operated floating equipment in the port of San Francisco, Calif.

These cases are before the Board on questions fully set out in the applications relating both to a dispute as to request for certain increases in wages of the employees and subordinate officials and as to certain changes in rules and working conditions.

As to the dispute regarding wages, the majority of the Board is of the opinion and finds, all facts and conditions relating to this matter being fully considered, that the wages now being paid and the rates which were in force and effect at the date of the termination of Federal control were and are reasonable, fair, and just, and the Board therefore denies the relief asked as to this matter, and dismisses the petitions and applications on this subject.

The Board has not undertaken herein to consider or change the rules and working conditions now existing or in force by the authority of the United States Railroad Administration or otherwise, and this decision will be so understood.

DECISION NO. 21.—DOCKET 55.

Chicago, Ill., November 23, 1920.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen; Order of Railway Conductors; Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Denver & Salt Lake Railroad Co.

Question.-Claim of Engineer C. B. Chidister, Firemen Z. W. Marks and C. C. Dixon for refund of moneys deducted from their pay, second period of March, 1920, to cover alleged overpayments, first period same month.

The submission contained the following joint statement of facts: Section A, rule 41. of Engineers, Firemen, and Hostlers' schedule, effective December 1, 1919, reads as follows:

"(a) Except in emergency, engineers or firemen will not be required to operate rotary snow plow, but if so used will receive following rates:

66

Engineer: Daily class rate of engine from which taken.

"Firemen: When firing, running, or piloting rotary snow plow, will receive daily class rate of engine from which taken.

"Extra engineers or firemen will receive class rate for engines weighing 170,000 to 200,000 pounds on drivers.

"Above to be computed upon basis of one day for eight hours, or less, overtime three-sixteenths of the daily rate, full time to be allowed while held in service."

Section A, rule 4, contains a table of rates covering the several classes of engines. Section B of same rule reads as follows:

"(b) The basis of computation shall be double the mileage rates in above table between mileposts 53 and 80."

The above-mentioned employees claimed time and were paid the double mileage rate for all miles made in the territory between mileposts 53 and 80. Later deductions were made to cover payments of all moneys paid for excess mileage allowed between mileposts 53 and 80.

Decision. It is stated, and not contradicted, that for the past 10 years the enginemen operating the rotary snow plow have been paid in the same manner as the engine crew who were used to push the plow; also, that rules governing those payments have not been changed. Claim of the employees is therefore sustained.

DECISION NO. 22.-DOCKET 56.

Chicago, Ill., November 23, 1920.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen; Order of Railway Conductors; Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Denver & Salt Lake Railroad Co.

Question.-Claim of Engineer E. W. Bell, Fireman P. J. Kohut, Conductor W. H. Hall, Brakemen L. Bartholomew and D. O'Connor for refund of moneys deducted from their pay, month of May, 1920, to cover alleged overpayments in the previous month.

The submission contained the following joint statement of facts:

The employees making the claim were called at Denver on April 14, 1920, to handle rotary snowplow. This being a regular pool freight crew and not regularly assigned to snowplow work, proceeded to a point near mile post 60, returned to Tolland, which is located near mile post 47, and at which point they were tied up.

The claim involves the question of pay for all time tied up in excess of the regular rest period. Claim was paid, and later, after the company had reclassified unassigned snowplow service as work-train service, took the position that the crew could be tied up under the same conditions as a work train, and deductions from their pay were made for all the time tied up in excess of minimum legal period off duty.

Decision.-Unassigned snowplow service has heretofore been paid under freight rules, and in the absence of a specific rule or agreement between the employees and the company regarding this particular class of service, the Board decides that the precedent established, and which is of long standing, should not be changed by this decision. Therefore the claim of the employees is sustained.

DECISION NO. 23.-DOCKET 57.

Chicago, Ill., November 23, 1920.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen; Order of Railway Conductors; Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Denver & Salt Lake Railroad Co.

Question.-Claim of Conductor W. C. Canann and Brakemen J. J. Simpson and G. E. Webb for refund of money deducted from their pay, account ruling of the company which places unassigned snowplow service in the same category as work-train service.

The submission contained the following joint statement of facts:

The above-named men, assigned to freight service, were called at Denver for westbound trip, being ordered to report for duty at 2.50 a. m., April 15, 1920; left at 3.10 a. m., and upon arrival at Tolland, picked up snowplow and operated same from Tolland to mile post 59; then returned to mile post 52; thence to mile post 59; then returned to Tolland, an intermediate point, reaching that point at 7.20 p. m., and were tied up for rest at 7.30 p. m., having been on duty 16 hours and 40 minutes.

Crew was called at 7.15 a. m. for duty April 16, resumed snowplow service, running over practically the same territory, and returned to Tolland, an intermediate point, at 3.20 a. m., April 17, having been on duty 22 hours and 50 minutes. This crew's period of rest was up at 1.20 p. m., April 17. Crew was called again at 1.20 p. m., April 17, and released until 10 p. m., at which time crew resumed duty, leaving Tolland for Denver at 12.30 a. m., April 18, 1920, which point (Denver) they reached at 9.45 p. m., April 19.

Crew claims continuous time, less time tied up under the law.

Time was originally allowed as claimed, but recheck was made and 11 hours deducted under the company's ruling, which ruling reclassified unassigned snowplow service and placed same in the category of work-train service. It is agreed by the parties at interest that the contentions in this case are similar to the contentions in Docket No. 56.

Decision.-Unassigned snowplow service has heretofore been paid under freight rules, and in the absence of a specific rule or agreement between the employees and the company regarding this particular class of service, the Board decides that the precedent established, and which is of long standing, should not be changed by this decision. The claim of the employees is therefore sustained.

DECISION NO. 24.-DOCKET 62.

Chicago, Ill., November 26, 1920.

Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers; Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen; Order of Railway Conductors; Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Denver & Salt Lake Railroad Co.

Question.-Claim of Conductors A. R. Emery and H. A. Crain and Brakemen F. Large, O. H. Huber, H. L. Jackson, and D. A. Ewing for runaround account regular freight crew assigned to another district being used in temporary or unassigned snowplow service on the district to which the men mentioned were assigned.

The submission contained the following joint statement of facts: Conductors Emery and Crain were assigned to pool freight service, running first-in first-out on the second district.

The crew used on the second district in temporary or unassigned snowplow service on this date held a like assignment to Emery and Crain, but on the first district only. The rules governing follow:

"Rule 9.-Unassigned crews will be run first-in first-out of terminals (arriving time to govern). All crews are unassigned except regular passenger, regular work trains, regular snowplow, and such other trains or positions as are put up for bid.

"Rule 14.-Crews not called in their turn will be allowed 50 miles, or onehalf day, at class rates and stand first-out. If not called within eight hours, 100 miles, or one day, will be allowed, and crew stand last-out."

On March 7, while Conductors Emery and Crain were lying at Tabernash, a regular district terminal, with full rest, Conductor P. E. Broderick and crew, holding assignment on first district, were used going west from Tabernash over the second district. Conductors Emery and Crain claimed runaround, and not being called for service until March 9, claimed 100 miles for runaround as more than eight hours elapsed from the time of the runaround until next service was begun.