The employes in their submission of this case to the Management contended that the two positions should be rated 69c per hour and classified as Baggagemen. To this contention the Carrier disagrees, as these men do not fulfill the duties of train baggagemen. Rules governing the classification of railroad employes prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission, define train baggagemen as a class of employes in which the duties of incumbents are to receive, care for and handle baggage, mail and express on trains; to operate dynamos in baggage cars when required, and to perform related work. The work assignment to these two positions does not require of the incumbent to receive, care for and handle baggage on trains as exacted of train baggagemen. These employes are of the station, warehouse and plaform worker group as defined in the Interstate Commerce Commission classification of railroad employes. Their assignment consists of handling of baggage in a baggage car at a passenger station in much the same manner as a stowman would handle freight in a freight car at a freight station. They do not leave this station; their work is confined exclusively to in and outbound baggage cars arrivlng at and departing from the St. Louis station.

The employes further contend in their submission of this claim to the Management that a rate of 69¢ per hour is applicable to these two jobs that we put on in June, 1942 for the reason that there were positions carried as "Baggagemen" in the November 1, 1928 settlement of a wage matter between the Clerks' Organization and the railroad. It is a fact that the November 1, 1928 wage settlement included three positions of Baggagemen at the Union Station, St. Louis, which were effected by this November 1, 1928 wage settlement to the extent of increasing the rates of pay thereunder from 52¢ to 54¢ per hour. These three particular positions, however, were discontinued in 1931. The duties assigned to these jobs at that time required of them to perform baggagemen duties. They were so classified on the payrolls. They handled mail and baggage from the platform trucks into car door and then proceeded to assist the train baggagemen. The duties assigned to the existing positions are, as heretofore stated, that of a Laborer or Stowman. They do not assist the baggagemen; as a matter of fact a train baggageman is not at all times on duty at the time the laborers are working on the inside of the baggage car, either stowing baggage therein or moving it from the inside of the car to the car door and delivering it to a truck operator, an employe of the Terminal Railroad Association. Their work, as heXetofore stated, is that of Laborer (Stower) and in no manner whatsoever subject to classification of a baggageman. The positions of baggageman involved in the 1928 wage settlement and discontinued in 1931 are not the same as the existing position of Laborer-Stower, therefore, Rule 76 of wage agreement with the Clerks' Organization, reading:

OPINION OF BOARD: The primary question presented by this dispute is whether the two employes involved in this dispute are "Baggagemen or Stowers."

Several years prior to 1931 the Carrier established positions for the purpose of loading and unloading baggage and mail on outbound and inbound passenger trains at the Union Station in St. Louis. The positions were listed as Baggagemen. The occupants of the positions handled packages and baggage shipments from the doorway of the baggage car and placed it in the car in station order. In unloading the cars they handled the baggage from its position in the car to the doorway of the car where it was passed or handled out to the employes of the Terminal Railroad Association. The outbound baggage was brought to the car door by the employes of the Terminal Rail-

road Association who at least in some instances, unloaded it from the trucks into the doorway of the baggage car.

It seems that during a period of about ten years prior to 1931, these positions were discontinued and reestablished several times, and that each time they were reestablished they were listed as "Baggagemen." In 1931 the positions were again discontinued or abolished and were not thereafter reestablished until in 1942 when they were again established or created and listed as "Stowmen" at a rate of .0525¢ per hour lower than the rate for Baggagemen.

The Carrier insists that when these positions were established in 1942, they were established as new positions and that since the duties more nearly corresponded to the duties of "Stowmen" than anything else the positions were classified as "Stowmen" and the pay was fixed at the same rate paid to stowmen.

The employes point out that the classification of "stowman" was never established by agreement of the parties at any other points than freight warehouse platforms where freight shipments are stowed in freight cars by "stowmen."

There seems to be considerable confusion in the record as to a correct definition of "baggageman." It seems perfectly clear from the record, however, that the occupants of these two positions after the positions were eswolished in 1942 were doing exactly the same work as was done by the occupants of these positions before the positions were discontinued in 1931 with the exception that in 1942 they were not permitted to handle the baggage from the baggage trucks in and out of the car doors. It is not clear just how much of this they did prior to 1931, but regardless of how much of the baggage these men handled in and out of the car door from 1922 to 1931, that was not such an important part of their work as to justify a different classification when that part of the work was omitted from the duties of the positions as established in 1942. The carrier, prior to 1931, classified these positions on the payrolls as "Baggagemen." In its submission, it says "The duties assigned to these jobs at that time required of them to perform bag"agemen duties." If they performed "baggagemen duties" prior to 1931, they have been performing "baggagemen duties" since 1942. Two of the men who formerly occupied these positions are now again occupying them and they say they are doing the same work now as when they formerly occupied these positions.

The Carrier should not be able to give a position involving essentially the same work and lower the rate on such position.

FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

That the carrier and employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

AWARD