This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.
The Organization argued that there was a practice to assign Carmen to wrecking work according to road truck territories On June 29, 2004 the Carrier instructed a Carman, Michael Morton, to travel to Auburn, ME and then to Rumford, ME to repair freight cars. The Organization argued that the Carrier violated the Side Letter No. 1 between the parties. While the Carrier claimed there is no past practice, the Carrier and the Organization adjusted road territories accordingly in 1995. When the Agreement in 1995 to combine the BM, MEC and Portland Terminal Railway into the Springfield Terminal Agreement, the wrecking territory and the road truck territories were delineated accordingly. This was accepted by both Parties. It was clearly acted upon and unequivocal The Organization attempted to get the Carrier to discuss the matter at the bargaining table, however, it would not. Therefore, the practice still applies and the claim should be sustained.
The Carrier argued that the Organization has the burden to prove by substantial evidence contained in the on-property record of this case that the Carrier violated the Agreement. The Organization provided no support for this claim. There is no portion of the Agreement that supports the Organization's claim and, therefore, it cannot be sustained. There is no rule nor any valid past practice to support the Organization's contentions. In addition, there are unsubstantiated damages and, therefore, the claim should be denied.
Upon review of the evidence the Board finds that there is insufficient evidence provided by the Organization to show a proven past practice. In the absence of such evidence the Board has no alternative but to dismiss the claim. The Organization is cautioned that, if it is going to bring such a case forward again, it provide more and specific proof that a past practice existed.