Heard at Montreal, Wednesday, September 9, 1981

Concerning

and

This concerns delay time pay claimed in the name of a mileage rated vehicleman for time spent in extension to and outside of his regularly scheduled bulletined and awarded assignment as established by Article 7.2.11 of our Working Agreement.

Mileage rated driver R. Inouye who works the Regina – Maple Creek route known as route 391-392 – bulletin #H-4, was instructed to proceed beyond his regular turn around point enroute to Medicine Hat which is outside of and in extension to his regularly scheduled hours of service and he was delayed at Medicine Hat for ninety (90) minutes, he booked this delay time at the delay time rate.

The Brotherhood contends that all such delay time was due to a directive by a Company Officer and that this extension to his regular route was fully carried out by this mileage rated vehicleman.

The Brotherhood demand delay pay as provided in Article 33.3 for all delay time booked at Medicine Hat, Alberta, by mileage rated vehicleman R. Inouye.

The Company suggests that such additional time is wait time as in Article 33.5 and for this reason have declined the Brotherhood’s request.

There appeared on behalf of the Company:

D. R. Smith – Director Industrial Relations Administration & Personnel, Montreal

B. D. Neill – Manager Labour Relations, Montreal

R. A. Colquhoun – Labour Relations Officer, CP Rail, Montreal

And on behalf of the Brotherhood:

J. J. Boyce – General Chairman, Toronto

G. Moore – Vice-General Chairman, Moose Jaw

J. Crabb – Vice-General Chairman, Toronto

Article 33.3 of the collective agreement is as follows:

"Terminal delay" is defined in article 33.1 as follows:

The short answer to this grievance (which on the Brotherhood’s statement of issue, is a claim under article 33.3), is that the delay in which the grievor was involved in this case was not "terminal delay", and that article 33.3 has no application.

The grievor did have a regularly scheduled assignment, awarded pursuant to article 7, and whose hours and other features were set out in a bulletin in conformity with article 7.2.11. It was, nevertheless, open to the company to make certain alterations in the assignment as circumstances required from time to time. Where such variations occur, the employee may be entitled to some extra payment. A number of such extra payments are contemplated by the various provisions of article 33, which deals with mileage-rated highway vehiclemen.

In the instant case the grievor’s regular assignment was altered in that instead of turning around at Maple Creek he proceeded to Medicine Hat, where he met another driver with whom he exchanged vehicles for the return to Regina. Time spent waiting for a meet or turnaround is "wait time" within the meaning of article 33.5, which is as follows:

It is clear from Article 33.5 that "the first hour" is to be excluded from the "wait time" which would otherwise be payable in the circumstances of this case. In the instant case, then, the grievor would be entitled to payment on the mileage basis for the extended trip, as well as to payment pursuant to article 33.5, that is to a payment of wait time exclusive of the first hour. Such, it seems is the payment that was made. The grievor was not entitled to payment for the first hour of "wait time", and the grievance to that effect must fail. Accordingly the grievance is dismissed.