Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 6829
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6740-I
2-B&o-I-'75



Parties to Dispute:

Dispute: Claim of Petitioner:

David L. Satterfield (Carman)

The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Compares

Is D. L. Satterfield entitled to compensation and allowances for being placed in a worst position with respect to his compensation due to the termination of the Locomotive Painters Craft at Grafton, West Virginia, in September, 1971?

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 Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

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

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

A review of the record in this dispute clearly shows that Petitioner is attempting to assert a claim before this-Board that was not handled on Carrier's property as required by Section 3, First (i) of the Railway Labor Act, Circular No. 1 of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, acrd not in accordance with the provisions of the applicable collective bargaining agreement. Therefore, the claim is barred from consideration. by the Division and must be dismissed.

A W A R D

Claim dismissed.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division




Dated at Chicago, Illinois,, this 11th day of March. 1975.