The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The dispute was still pending with SBA No. 570 when on June 1, 1993, the parties at the National Level agreed that disputes of this type which had not been assigned to and argued before a Referee at SBA No. 570 could "be withdrawn by either party at any time prior to August 1, 1993.1' The Agreement allowed that "a dispute withdrawn pursuant to this paragraph may be refered to any boards available under Section 3 of the RLA . . . ." (underscore ours for emphasis)
The Claimants in this case were furloughed on May 31, 1989 while employed at the Carrier's Cleburne, Texas, facility. The basic claim of the Organization is that the Claimants were deprived of protection conveyed by Article I of the September 25, 1964 Agreement ("Agreement"). It asserts that the Claimants' furloughs were the result of the Carrier's decision to transfer their work to Topeka, Kansas, and San Bernadino, California, and the subsequent actions to achieve that goal and later abandonment of the Cleburne facility.
When denying the claims, the Carrier argued that what occurred came about basically because of economic reasons and the normal workload fluctuation that impact on employment.
The Board, after careful review of all the evidence, agrees with the Carrier. While it is understandable from our review of the many events and circumstances relied upon by the Organization why it concludes that work was transferred "in anticipation" of the closure of Cleburne, the evidence does not support a nexus. The Agreement provides that protective benefits are provided only when an operational change listed in Article I of that Agreement has occurred. We do not find such a condition here. Form 1 Award No. 12847
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.