Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENf BOARD Award No. 7650
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7574-I
 2-B&o-C&o-I-' 78




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.

Among the B & 0's former facilities was a car repair shop known as the DuBois Car Shop (in DuBois, Pennsylvania). It employed various crafts, including Machinists.

 As of early 1977, most of the DuBois Car Shop's operations were relocated to the C & O's Raceland Car Shops at Russell, Kentucky. The employes affected by the relocation were protected by an Agreement which had become effective on January 1, 1976 and which carries the title "Agreement for Employe Protection, Benefits and Other Conditions Applicable in Coordinations Involving Employes Represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, the Western Maryland Railway Company and the Staten Island Railroad Corporation". A portion of this Agreement reads as follows:
 'Form 1 Award No. 7650
 Page 2 Docket No. 7574-I
 2-B&0-C&o-I-'78
 "Employes whose jobs are abolished or who are
 displaced as a result thereof and who have been
 neither assigned new positions nor offered such
 positions pursuant to Section 2 (a) above, and
 whose seniority is such that they are unable to
 hold a position on the seniority roster on which
 working at the time of coordination, and who are
 not offered a position under paragraph (b) hereof,
 will be paid a dismissal allowance pursuant to
 Article III, Section 2. Such an employe may, at
 his option, at the time of coordination, resign and
 be subject to a separation allowance computed in
 accordance with Section 9 of the Washington Job
 Protection Agreement."

 It is concededly true that the relocation of the operations from the B & 0 DuBois Shop to the C & 0 Raceland Shop represented a "coordination" as referred to in the Agreement. Affected by the coordination, among other crafts, were three Machinists. Each of them elected to resign, and each of them thus collected the equivalent of a year's pay in separation pay (plus vacation pay, as also called for by the Agreement).

 The claimant is a Machinist who had previously worked at the DuBois Car Shop, who held a seniority date of November 13, 1946, and who had been furloughed as of September 17, 1963. On the basis of a series of arguments -- long and loyal service with the Carrier, displacement from work with the Carrier on two past occasions, fairness, discrimination -- the claimant contends that he should have received the same benefits as the three Machinist resignees.

 We sympathize with the claimant's joblessness and his apparent conviction that he has been mistreated. But there is simply no proper way to sustain the claim he is making. Each of the other three Machinists was "older" (in terms of seniority standing) than the claimant. In result, they were still working at the DuBois Car Shop at the time of the "coordination" -- whereas he was not. They, accordingly, were covered by the Agreement and entitled to its benefits -- whereas he was not. The claimant is in effect asking us to allow him to collect on a contractual right which has not been conferred on him. We cannot grant such a request.

 We have chosen to show what the case is concerned with and thus to dispose of it on its merits. However, both on the grounds that the "coordination" Agreement expressly calls for resort to a Public Law Board in the event of necessary adjudication under it and on the grounds that no conference on the dispute was requested or held at the property, we note that the case is procedurally defective to begin with.
 Form 1 Award No. 7650
 Page 3 Docket No. 7574-I
 2-B&0-C&O-I-'78




                          By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By ~"i
      o emarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant


Dated a Chicago, Illinois, this 4th day of August, 1978.
 Form 1 NATIONAL RAILBOAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7651
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7625
 2-WP-CM-t78

    The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Herbert L. Marx, Jr. when award was rendered.


                ( System Federation No. 117, Railway Employes'

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

Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)

                (

                ( Western Pacific Railroad Company


Dispute: Claim of Employes:
        1. That Carman B. R. Mooney was unjustly discharged from the service of the Western Pacific Railroad Company in violation of the rules of the controlling agreement by letter dated June 30, 1976, as a result of investigation held on June 14, 1976.


        2. That accordingly, the Western Pacific Railroad Company be ordered to reinstate Carman B. R. Mooney to service with pay for all time lost, with all rights and fringe benefits unimpaired.


Statement:
The above question was submitted to the Second Division of the National Railroad Adjustment Board by the above referred to organization in ex parte form, hearing thereon was waived, and the Division is now in receipt of a request from the employes that the case be withdrawn.

                      A W A R D


    Claim dismissed.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By
      se rie Brasch - Administrative Assistant


Dated at hicago, Illinois, this 4th day of August, 1978.