Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7274
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7136
2-C&NW-MA-'77





Parties to Dispute:



Dispute: Claim of Employes:









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 Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.



On January 30, 1975 Carrier posted a bulletin advertising the availability of Mechanic-in-Charge position (#663) at Carrier's East Minneapolis fueling facility. Claimant applied for the position which was assigned to an employe who was junior to Claimant.
Form 1 Award No. 7274
Page 2 Docket No. 7136
2-CaNw-MA-'77

The Organization contends that Carrier violated Rule 16 of the Agreement and Paragraph 7 of the June 1, 1939 Memorandum of Agreement.











The Organization contends further that Claimant was qualified for the classification of Mechanic-in-Charge because he was assigned to relieve the Mechanic-inCharge for a five week period in 1973-1974.



1 - Bulletining the position of Mechanic-in Charge was an error made by a local Superintendent.

2 - Mechanic-in-Charge positions have always been appointed by Carrier since 1936 when the job title was changed from Working Foreman to Mechanic-inCharge.

3 - Claimant was less qualified than the junior employe selected based on Claimant's performance during the five week relief period in 1973-1974.





Assuming, without deciding, that Carrier is bound by an erroneous bulletin, Paragraph 7 of the June 1, 1939 Memorandum Agreement and not Rule 16 determines the criterion for the selection of a Mechanic-in-Charge. Paragraph 7 does not require the mandatory appointment of a senior employe. It has the effect of requiring the appointment of the senior employe if there are two or more employes deemed to be equally qualified. Determination of qualification is the Carrier's province unless it is shown that Carrier was arbitrary or capricious in its determination. Such has not been shown in the instant dispute.
Form 1 Page 3

Award No. 7274
Docket No. 7136
2-C&NW-MA-'77

Second Division Award No. 861 is distinguishable in that qualification was not in issue in that dispute.

A W A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Ad,--ustment Board

By

Dated at

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


arie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Chicago, Illinois, this 5th day of April, 1977.