within it least for this particular job is not within the scope of the employment the circumstances of being called in from one's time off for an impending emergency of the railroad were impending extra work employees why the exact not and not typically other circumstances that apply to our case were present during that that's what puzzles me because i can't see any way in which the risks why driving to an overtime shift would be different from driving to a regular guest when the risks of the two people driving to the same place at the same time are identical because he under the supervision of the roadmaster he was coming in when he didn't have to do that and could avoid the hazard of this severe snowstorm he was doing it for the benefit of the railroad now of course everybody who goes to work but you want to distinguish the over time reporter from any non over time reporter and that's when i can get the regular employee might qualify for an f t l a case if he had supervision of his employer the road manager if he was coming in doing something different then a normal commute that circumstance of the normal commute is tied to the scope of the employment and i think i understand the circumstances would be something like in the goldwater case where the employee was sent by a supervisor on a special mission forty miles away and she was using the train and she got assaulted as i remember during this trip now if she had just been going on a meeting forty miles away her regular shift not been sent by the boss and not been specially appointed to do that then the cases would say and there are many cases of people are just commuting that they're not covered  whether the act covers the act not covered the person usually reporting the work on his regular shift because what he's doing in that travel is not incident to the real road work that's what the case is interpret the act to along the train line while he was driving and he could have in other ways had his actions dictated by the railroad in the way that the ordinary computer commuter commuter d i take it that four people who are called in for special assignments will make it to the workplace they get paid indeed they so at least we know that much the rarity that much and he would to the public and so you know that rule it has its own exceptions because if somebody showed up to work having driven from home not in work status fine and then in the middle of the day the company needs him on the way to work if it's a person simply commuting to super pfizer could call me to say you know i'm not you know i'm not interested in taking that route that i'll be there on time when the workday begins that he road worthy but how about if the record is going to pay for his time anyway should've called him in the previous evening rather than saying we're calling you now why don't you come in and twelve hours after there's more snow issue before the court is whether or not the district judge erred in kind of questions of fact we could look at the facts and draw judgments one way or the other and that's what the jury's going to have to do not the court in response to judge factor there he's on his way he's within the scope of his employment voluntariness is not material consideration there also is evidence in the record from the parish and ellen burns that when you get peace calls if you can come you're expected to do so and these are collateral roadmaster they tell us what the policy and practice of the railroad is and