Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 12027
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 11998
 91-2-90-2-124
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Joseph A. Sickles when award was rendered.
 (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Burlington Northern Railroad Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 1. That in violation of the current Agreement, Appendix 'E' in particular the Burlington Northern Railroad Company failed to remove exempt Electricians E. R. Liebenow and T. L. Lougee from the Rocky Mountain seniority roster subsequent to these exempt Electricians' refusal to continue to maintain the applicable seniority maintenance fee in accord with the agreement.

 2. That accordingly the Burlington Northern Railroad Company should be instructed to remove the names of exempt Electricians E. R. Liebenow and T. L. Lougee from the Rocky Mountain District seniority roster.

 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.

On January 26, 1981 the parties agreed that exempt individuals who had been promoted to Supervisory positions prior to that date could retain and continue to accrue seniority as long as they paid membership dues. Those who refrained from payment of dues ceased to accumulate seniority; but rather, they retained seniority only, or progressed one year forward each year thereafter.

 Two exempt employees identified in this Claim were so advised, and they opted to pay membership dues. However, after six (6) years they both opted to discontinue payment.
 Form 1 Award No. 12027 .rrr
 Page 2 Docket No. 11998
 91-2-90-2-124
 The Organization argues that the option to pay (or not to pay) member
 ship dues was a "one time" option and once these individuals revoked their
 original decisions, they forfeited seniority and Carrier must remove them from
 the seniority list.
 The Carrier resists this Claim on the ground that there is nothing in
 the Agreement that reasonably supports the Organization's conclusion. In
 addition, it points out an asserted inconsistency since those who paid dues
 for a period of time and then opted to cease payments, would be treated more
 harshly than those who never opted to make any payments, regardless of their
 relative length of service, since the ones who never paid would concededly
 continue to retain.
 This Board can find nothing in the Agreement which purports to sus
 tain the Organization's position in this case, and we are reluctant to remove
 an employee's seniority in the absence of specific language permitting, or
 requiring, that action.
 A W A R D




          J


Attest:
        Nancy J~ e r - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of March 1991.