Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 12191
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 12066
 91-2-90-2-243
 . The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Barry E. Simon when award was rendered.
 (Brotherhood Railway Carmen/Division of TCU

 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 1. That the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Company (CSX Transportation, Inc.) (hereinafter "carrier") violated the provisions of Rule 27 1/2 .if the Shop Crafts Agreement between Transportation Communications Internationai Union - Carmen's Division and the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Company (CSX Transportation, Inc.) (revised June 1, 1969) and the service rights of Cayman Stanley Reed (hereinafter "claimant") when on December 18 and 19, 1986 the carrier called Cayman Randy Meeks in violation of Rule 27 1/2 of the Controlling Agreement.

 2. That, accordingly, the claimant is entitled to be compensated for sixteen (16) hours at the applicable straight time rate for the carrier's violation of the aforementioned Rule.

 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 dates of claim, wh::le Claimant was in furlough status, Carrier used an employee junior in sen::ority to Claimant to fill a two day vacancy as an ABD valve repairman in the Air Brake Shop at Carrier's Raceland Shop. Claimant had requested he be used for relief work under Rule 27-1/2, which reads, in pertinent part, as fellows:
 Form 1 Award No. 12191
 Page 2 Docket No. 12066
 91-2-90-2-243
 "(a) The Carrier shall have the right to use fur
 loughed employes to perform extra work, and relief
 work on regular positions during absence of regular
 occupants, provided such employes have signified in
 the manner provided in paragraph (b) hereof their
 desire to be so used. This provision is not intended
 to supersede rules or practices which permit employes
 to place themselves on vacancies on preferred posi
 tions in their seniority districts, it being under
 stood, under these circumstances, that the furloughed
 employe will be used, if the vacancy is filled, on
 the last position that is to be filled. It is also
 understood that management retains the right to use
 the regular employe, under pertinent rules of the
 agreement, rather than call a furloughed employe.
 (b) Furloughed employes desiring to be considered
 available to perform such extra and relief work will
 notify the proper officer of the Carrier in writing,
 with copy to the local chairman, that they will be
 available and desire to be used for such work.
 (c) Furloughed employes who have indicated their
 desire to participate in such extra and relief work





The Carrier submits the applicable Rules allow it to make assignments under Rule 27-1/2 based upon the qualifications of the employees, rather than on a strict seniority basis without regard to qualifications. It notes Rule 27-1/2 requires employees be used "in accordance with the rules of the agreement," and argues those Rules dealing with relief service and temporary vacancies all provide for the use of qualified employees. Carrier further asserts Claimant was not on the list of employees who were qualified to repair ABD valves.

 The Organization argues Rule 27-1/2 is clear and unambiguous, making no reference to qualifications. It asserts Carrier had a duty to allow Claimant a fair opportunity to demonstrate his abilities to perform the work in question. Further, the Organization denies the Carrier's allegation Claimant lacked the requisite qualifications for the job in question.

 At the outset, we must determine whether or not Rule 27-1/2 contemplates the use of employees strictly on a seniority basis without regard to qualifications. It is our determination it does not. First, we note the Rule requires reference to other Rules of the Agreement; it does not stand alone.
 Form 1 Award No. 12191
 Page 3 Docket No. 12066
 91-2-90-2-243

 All other Rules in the Agreement which deal with the filling of short-term vacancies allow the Carrier to consider qualifications. The only Rule to which we have been referred which does not require the employee to have previously demonstrated he is qualified is Rule 18, which governs the filling of bulletined vacancies. Even that Rule requires the employee bidding a vacancy to be familiar with the work in a general way. It provides for a trial period, which ordinarily should not consume more than three days, for the employee to "get the run of the work." The Rule further distinguishes this trial period from a period of learning the job.

 In addition to the above, we note Rule 27-1/2 states positions filled thereunder are done so on a day-to-day basis. In light of the nature of these vacancies, it would be an unreasonable interpretation of the Rule to require the Carrier to call an employee without knowing whether or not he could do the work. There is obviously no opportunity for training under such circumstances,.

 Turning our attention to the issue of whether Claimant was qualified, we rely upon the principle that it is the Organization's burden to prove the Carrier erred or was arbitrary in its determination. There is nothing in the record before this Board which goes toward meeting this burden of proof. Accordingly, we must conclude the Agreement was not violated.

        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Second Division


Attest:
          y J. D -Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 6th day of November 1991.