' i


            Advance copy. The ususal printed copies will be sent later.) .


                                                                I

Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD AWUST14ENT BOARD Award No. 6458
 ' SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6303
 2-B&O-EW-' 73
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 . addition Referee Irving T. Bergman when award was rendered.
                                                                i

                                                                I


                  ( System Federation to- 30, Railway Employes'

                  ( Department, A: F. of L. - C. I. 0.

Parties to Dispute: ( (Electricians) I

                  ( The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company


Dispute: Claim of Etrtployes: - -

        1. That the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Corparly deprived Electrician

            N. F. Billings seniority and employment rights as such, when they '

            removed his name from the Electrician's Seniority Roster, Western

            Region, Point 15, in violation of Rule.22E and 28 of the Agreement

            in point. I


            2. That accordingly the Carrier be ordered to reinstate Claimant Electrician N. F. Billings to the. Fa,ectrici='s Seniority Roster, Western Region, Point 15, Washington, Indiana with all seniority and employment rights accruing therefrom.


.ndings:

 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 Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 193'+.

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

      . Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.


In May 1966, claimant was an electrician's helper. He was assigned to fill a temporary vacancy for which no bids were received by electricians with seniority. Clairiant completed the required ld~O ho·,ars as a tentative electrician in December 1966, and continued to fill the temporary vacancy until December 1970. At that tithe, the vacancy was declared to be permanent as the result of correspondence i from electrician Green who had seniority. The position was advertised and furloughed electricians were recalled according to seniority. Claimant requested and was granted a transfer from the 1.1 of E Department into the Maintcn,^nce Of Way., as a sheet metal worker. The Organization states that this transfer was requested, "In the light of Ae complaints initiated by electrician Green, a senior etrploye,- - -.", Employes'
                                                                `-submission, p. 4. i

          w

Award No.
 Form 1 - Docket No. 630? j 6458
 Page 2 2-H&O-EW-'73 ~
Iri order to maintain continuous employment relationship with the carrier, claimant was granted a department release, otherwise he would be regarded as a new employe, Employes' Submission, p. 5. The Organization argues that when granted the department release, claimant was at the same time released as an/employe filling a temporary vacancy and could thereafter bid on a permanent vacancy with his seniority, under Rules 15 and 24.

 After claimant transferred to sheet metal worker, electrician Green apparently changed his mind and did not bid to fill the permanent vacancy. On January 7, 1971, carrier hired an electrician to fill the vacancy. On January 25, 1971, this claim was filed.

 The carrier has argued that claimant's name was dropped frm the electrician's seniority roster when he started to work as a sheet metal worker. The bulletin for the electrician's vacancy was posted December 4, to expire on December 8. Claimant voluntarily left his position on December 6. The carrier insists that there is no rule or practice which would permit claimant to retain his seniority as electrician in the departmer':he vacated, under these facts. hO~,;ever, the carrier agrees that an employe ca-. protect his seniority on one roster when voluntarily vacating a position on hat roster to take a position in another craft on another roster,under Rule 18. aut, the carrier contends that claimant did not seek and obtain proper authority for trm:sfer by obtaining a bona fide leave of absence under Rule 18, to protect his seniorit; -s an electrician, Carrier's Submission, p.3.

 The facts indicate that claimant acted quickly to assure continuous employment for himself by transferring voluntarily before the time expired for a senior electrician. ; o 'bid the permanent vacancy. VThen no senior electrician bid for the permanent vacancyq claimant wanted to get back to electrician because he would then' have the security of being senior electrician. The burden of proving that he could do this is upon tie claimant. None of the rules discussed by the Organization supports this contention. No practice has been stated which would give sucta meaning to a department release.

 Rule 18, headed heave of Absence, is interpreted (as stated in Rule) to provid.e.for. a leave of absence to engage in other e:-ployment if the employe obtains the ,joLn't consent of the proper official arid committee representing his cra°t. Othen-;ise the employ°'s seniority is forfeited.

 'Ihe Organization has not offered evidence to overcome the requirements of Rule 18, 4s i3.a.tcr.rcted therein. Cl ai~nant did not apply, for a leave of absence and obtain the joilit ccnsen`t required to protect his seniorit-y on the electrician's ro;, t er.
                            A W A R D


        ~~_il.~_ia lJ.ni~? e~.. -


                            hATTOI`AL RAILROAD ADTUST'.E11T BOARD

                - Bar Order of Second Division '


At t e s t ; :-r .,.-~ ,fir...
 L:~>ec;~.t i~:c uecret ary

 Dated. at Chicago, _I-1_nois, this 2ith day of February, 1°73.