on the effective date of the agreement providing for three weeks vacation. Since he was not in carrier's service on the effective date of that agreement, he is not subject to the provisions thereof, and is not entitled to the benefits thereof.

There is no merit to the instant claim, and it must be denied iia its entirety.

FINDINGS: The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railtvay Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

The parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

This claim is made in behalf of retired Laborer W. T. Thompson. Thompson had continuously been in the carrier's employment at Alliance, Nebraska, since September 21, 1932. He retired under the provisions of the Railroad Retirement Act on September 1, 1953. At the time of his retirement he had rendered not less than one hundred and thirty-three (133) days of compensated service in 1953. Upon retirement claimant was paid for two (2) weeks, or ten (10) days' pay, in lieu of vacation for 1954, which -vacation carrier acknowledges was due him by reason of Article 8 of the Vacation Agreement. However, claimant contends the payment should have been for three (3 ) weeks, or fifteen (15) days' pay, citing Article 1, Section 1(c) of the National Vacation Agreement of August 21, 1954 in support thereof.

Carrier contends the claim should be denied because it was not properly handled on the property under the provisions of Article V of the National Agreement of August 21, 1954, which Article became effective on January 1, 1955.

The claim was first filed with Master Mechanic C. J. Harty , at Alliance, Nebraska, on December 13, 1954. Harty denied it on December 16, 1954. No further action was taken by the organization until after January 1, 1955 when the provisions of Article V hereinbefore referred to became effective. Section 2 thereof, which deals with claims or grievances filed prior to the effective date thereof provides, in situations such as here, that an appeal must be taken within sixty (60) days after the effective date of Article V (January 1, 1955) and thereafter handled on the property pursuant to paragraph (b) of Section 1 of Article V.

Paragraph (b) of Section 1 of Article V, insofar as here material, provides:

"If a disallowed claim or grievance is to be appealed, such appeal must be in writing and must be taken within 60 days from receipt of notice of disallowance, and the representative of the Carrier shall be notified in writing within that time of the rejection of his decision. Failing to comply with this provision, the matter shall be considered closed, * * '~."

Organization's General Chairman C. P. Wells, by letter dated January 25, 1955, presented the claim to O. A. Moody, carrier's assistant general superintendent of motive power at Denver, Colorado. Moody declined it on January 31, 1955. Thereafter, on February 9, 1955, it was appealed by letter to Staff Officer W. E. Angier, carrier's highest designated officer to handle such matters, but Moody was never notified that his decision had.been

"Under this provision an appeal to the next higher representative from a decision rendered by a subordinate official or representative does not automatically constitute notice of rejection by the employe representative, of the decision rendered by such subordinate official or representatiye: However, the representative to whom the appeal is taken must refuse to consider the claim because of that

' fact and if lie fails to do so and considers it solely on its merits then the failure to give such written notice of rejectipy to the sub-

ordinate official will be considered to have been waived." !.

AWARD