adjustment in the rate of the position. Rule 69 does not read as the employes would have your Board interpret it, i.e., "any increase in the duties and responsibilities of a position, regardless of how small or insignificant requires an immediate upward adjustment in the rate of pay of the position."

In view of the above, it is the Carrier's position that there has not been "sufficient added duties and responsibilities" in requiring the Transportation Clerks to perform this small amount of work to warrant an upward adjustment in their pay rate of $15.00 per month. The requested raise in the rate of pay is not supported by the facts in the case. In fact, no upward adjustment is required by the application of Rule 69 of the controlling Clerks' Agreement.

For this reason, the Carrier has declined the claim of the employes and respectfully requests your Honorable Board to do likewise.

It is hereby affirmed that all of the foregoing is, in substance, known to the Organization's representatives.

(Exhibits not reproduced.)

OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimants have failed to meet their burden of proof showing that the duties of the Transportation Clerks have been increased to such a degree as to justify an adjustment in their rate of pay as set forth in Rule 69 and the note thereunder defining "sufficient"

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

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

For the reasons stated in the Opinion this claim is denied.

AWARD