noted that in making that determination the court notes that the work performed was outside the normal scope of their employment and that certainly is the focus here whether or not that's true i submit that based upon the u union members as including salvage services because they went to the trouble to address that in the collective bargaining agreement the i b u union contract work but it only comes along once a year or two then by the definition of its how infrequently it happens do you then say that that falls outside the ordinary scope of work now is there any evidence in the record where they're called upon to do with salvage and there's some planning for it as opposed to they got a ship up there with the trouble of it is you know rushed or i believe i believe the only evidence would be the page turns contained in the collective bargaining agreements members that they have in our union contract reference to doing salvage work and i would be more impressed with that argument if the record showed testimony about what the  receives the largest percentage of the salvage award because they have the largest investment in the largest risk with all the equipment that they dedicated the investment in everything else and here in particular  anything i think deserved fairly a premium on top of that the reason being that if you find that these services are voluntarily rendered you still know back to the same facts that those men would have not been there unless percent of an award and i would think in this case under these facts a premium on top of that in the range of seventy five percent would be appropriate and by the way there is that one case the second  crowley and this is a hundred percent syrians are probably management view this has been a rescue operation which in the ordinary course of their duties they did not regard it has been salvaged at all and the evidence to think is build their allocation fashion in the award issue of the the great great strength of salvage law in terms of all the cases virtually all the cases is that everybody on board the that as to those people are energies that do not bring their claims such as here you have the owner crowley the captain did not bring a claim the cook in nothing exclaimed in her purse or who happen to be on board but substantially system with the effort to make it successful all of them do not bring claims to the laws crystal clear going back to the blackwell the founding father of salvage law if those claims that are not right in yours for t benefit of the cell vessel energy ducted from the five percent in other words if crowley were awarded seventy five percent that would be detected from the five percent as with the other individuals to arrive upon inept  participated in a salvage operation so these many years that these crew members had worked for crowley there was only one crew member who had been involved in one salvage operation the training that these people had received dealt with assisting oil tankers having problems outside of the bow these locale which is far different from rescuing a tug and barge out on the open seas evidence in the record that to support the district court's finding that the work performed by the plaintiffs was outside the normal course of their of their employment and based on the clearly erroneous standard that finding should be affirm discretion well i know that from my research i have done quite a bit of research over the last two and a half years on this case of salvage law in that two hundred years of this country has been deciding salvage cases i could find not property was already at rest when that when the sea that's in contrair so it's probably is already at rest so there would be no reason to enter an award inducing them to put their property at risk because they already have the motivation to go out to save another person's property and that purpose would not be served in this case by requiring the court as a matter of law to allocate a portion of the award to two reduced to precise rules but he plans on part of consideration of all the circumstances of each case and with all due respect this house did not hear the evidence and the case did not see the witnesses as not in a position to determine required an allocation of a warrant and again the same part case says that they may share an award again there's no holding by this court or any other court that i'm aware of at least it says that the district operation think here about fifty five minutes it was of the jumping over and securing it from the time they they jumped over to the time all the gear with it was put away and they had intel it took approximately fifty five minutes language of the contract states that whenever but for those acting on its behalf waive the right to claim salvage such waivers should be construed as a waiver made on behalf of the group and shall be binding upon all of its members so the contract language requires a waiver to be taken by crowley in order to find the members there was there was no contract language that automatically waives the right to claim salvage and the finding of fact made by judgment government was that there was no evidence that a waiver had then made by crowley in this case and there there was a total absence of evidence of a waiver taken on by the members of the crew and i just want to summarize for you mr hay stock who was the engineer who was on the entire time of the entire fifty five minutes he was handling the lines in the gear on voyage or worth were connected he was on deck doing all of the work his allocation and the salvage was ten thousand dollars mr purser if he's in cairo to an allocation it would have been an insignificant simply no allocation made because it doesn't govern rightly felt that his work was not significant enough to make an allocation in this case entered would be inconsistent with the widely accepted rule that the amount and allocation of a salvage award is strictly within the y discretion of the trial court and s the salvage you can be a sack you can be given and out at portion of the award and the judge after hearing the evidence in this case determined that this massacre i did skillfully navigate the vassal and did determine