Form 1 NATIONAL RAILFOAD ADJUST!= BOARD Award No. 8152
 SECOND DIVISION Docket 7.1.. 7698-'T
 2-BNI-SM-'79



Parties to Dispute:


Dispute: Claim of Employes:











Findings:
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and E611 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.

At issue here is the work necessary to maintain the air filteration/ heating system atop the Wheel Shop at the Carrier's Havelock,, Nebraska, facility. Intervening as a party at interest here is the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEI~T) which asserts its own rights to perform suet, work under its existing rules. rf,11ile extensive ar gaments are put forth by the organization and !BD-T in this regard, a careful assessment of the applicable rules, in conjunction urith the work involved., fails to support either claim to such work. A sufficient showing was made that such work was, at the time of the incident in dispute here, performed by various
 Form 1 Page 2

 Award 1;o. 8152
 Docket No. 76'9-8-T
 2-BNI-SM-'79

 crafts at various locations within the Carrier's system. The Organization readily admits it lacks exclusivity system-wide to perform such work but predicates this circumstance upon a lack of represented employees at such locations. The essence of the Organization's position is to claim the right of qualified represented employees to perform such work where they ?re located within the Carrier's System. We are unable to find support for such a claim which would reserve such work when, and if, a represented employe is assigned to a location requiring such work. It would appear that such work is routine in nature and not requiring any particular skill of any trade. What is important, however, is the Organization's offering of a letter from Shop Superintendent Spomer, dated August 20, 1976, to subordinate supervision stating:

 "Effective at once, whenever it is necessary to change the filters in air conditioning units, Sheet Metal Workers will do the work and electrical forces are not to be used in this work again.

 Each of those addressed should acknowledge receipt and understanding of these instructions, and take such action as is necessary to assure compliance."

 (Exhibit J of the OrUanization
 Ex Parte Submission)

 The Carrier cannot at once claim the right to make -assignments and thereafter ignore or claim a lack of obligation to adhere to its own directives which substantiates its rights to effect such assigznnents. Obviously, a duly authorized representative of the Carrier -- indeed, the Shop Superintendent -- has determined, for economic or other conditions, that such work will b e performed as set out in its August 20, 1976 letter. We conclude that this letter -- which was never refuted or denied on the record, represents the Carrier's decision as to how such work will be performed past the incident cited herein, insofar as changing air conditioning filters is concerned at that location. However, we find no basis for the claim set forth for compensation on the date of July 26, 1976.

 A W A R D

 Claim disposed of in accordance with the findings,

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUST= BOARD

By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 Roseiarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at (Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of October, 1979.