Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 11385
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 10982-T
 2-CR-EW-'87
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee T. Page Sharp when award was rendered.
 (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
 Parties to Dispute:
 (Consolidated Rail Corporation

 Dispute: Claim of Disputes:

 1. That under the current Agreement, especially Rules I., II., 5-F-1., the Consolidated Rail Corporation improperly assigns others, including Carmen to perform the following work, which is Electricians' work.





















Form 1 Award No. 11385
 Page 2 Docket No. 10982-T
 2-CR-EW-'87
 01-08-83 - 11:00 PM to 07:00 AM ,~,r












































Form 1 Award No. 11385
 Page 3 Docket No. 10982-T
 2-CR-EW-187











2. That accordingly the Consolidated Rail Corporation should be ordered to compensate Caboose Track Electricians Mario Ciprioni, Gerald Dare and Don Van Hoesen, an additional amount computed by multiplying the number of man-hours it pays others to perform the aforementioned work by time and onehalf the applicable electricians' rate of the Claimants, each day it assigns the aforementioned work to others, beginning 60 calendar days before the date of this letter (claim), and continuously thereafter, including the aforelisted dates, as long as the Carrier assigns the aforementioned work to others; said total to be divided equally among them, in order to make them whole.

 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 employes 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.

As third party in interest, the Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States and Canada and the Transport Workers Union of America were advised of the pendency of this case. The Brotherhood Railway Carmen chose to file a Submission with the Division, the Transport Workers Union chose not to file a Submission with the Division.

 Claims were submitted by the Organization alleging that work accruing exclusively to its craft had been performed by members of the Carmen craft. The three claimants were track Electricians. One of these worked 7:00 AM - 3:00 AM, rest days of Saturday and Sunday; another 3:00 PM - 11:00 PM, rest days of Thursday and Friday; and the third worked relief for these two positions with relief day on Wednesday. As can be seen by the assignments there
 Form 1 Award No. 11385
 Page 4 Docket No. 10982-T
 2-CR-EW-'87

 are periods of time at the Selkirk facility in which there are no Electricians on duty.

 The Carrier contends that Carmen performed certain work "such as repairing marker lights battery connections and changing batteries, on cabin cars." It denies that the Carmen perform any work exclusively reserved to Electricians in the Organization's Schedule Agreement.

 Although the Scope Agreement lists many specific tasks that are exclusively reserved to the Electrical craft, the Organization has not shown to this Board any provision whereby the type of work claimed is exclusively reserved. The Organization submitted many resolved claims which they state shows that the practice in the past has been to assign this work to the Electrical Craft.

 The Carrier contends that Classification of Work Rules from the Carmen's and the Organization's Agreements control. These Rules state:





          "Except as otherwise determined by a joint jurisdicition committee, it is further understood and agreed in the application of this Carmen's Classification of Work that any work specified herein which is being performed on the property of any former component railroad by employees other than Carmen may continue to be performed by such other employees at the locations at which such work was performed by past practice or agreement on the effective date of this Agreement; and it is also understood that work not included within this Carmen's Classification of Work

Form 1 Award No. 11385
 Page 5 Docket No. 10982-T
 2-CR-EW-187
 which is being performed on the property of any former
 component railroad by Carmen will not be removed from
 such Carmen at they locations at which such work was
 performed by past practice or agreement on the effec
 tive date of this Agreement."

 As can be seen by comparison of the two classification Rules, they are identical except for the name of the crafts. The assertion is made that the Carmen had historically performed this work, along with Electricians, therefore there is no Rule violation.

 The Carrier answered the issue of the submitted Claims by addressing each of these and pointing out that only two of these Claims concern cabooses. Two Claims over a multi-year period will not suffice to show the degree of past practice necessary to establish exclusivity.

 The Organization would have the Board place the burden of proof on the Carrier who is in control of the necessary elements, if there are any, to develop the facts. However, the burden is on the Claimants to create a prima facie case. When making a serious Claim as work jurisdiction this initial burden cannot rightfully be placed on the Carrier.

 As can be seen in part one of the Claim, caboose numbers are stated for a series of days and the Beard must infer that by implication violations of paragraphs (a) through (e) .are alleged to have occurred on each of the cabooses on each of the stated days. Generalities of this sort do not frame the Claim in a manner specific enough to permit the kind of analysis necessary for decision.

 The Claim must be specific enough to allow the Carrier to know what is properly alleged so that it can respond with a defense if one exists. A Claimant cannot allege broad violations of the Agreement and expect the Carrier in its answer to develop the Claimant's case. The Claim herein does not meet this degree of specificity. Because of this the Board will dismiss the Claim.

                        A W A R D


        Claim dismissed.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                              By Order of Second Division


Attest:
        Nancy ever - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 18th day of November 1987.
 rI"

 vmve