(81 mins. which may be considered work performed by Agt.)

It is observed from the above that the work of the clerk at both of these stations still remains, and that the additional duties being performed, which may be considered work performed by the Agent, certainly are not sufficient to justify a position of Agent at either of these points.

Insofar as the consolidation of the freight and ticket agencies are concerned, the position of the Carrier in the instant claim is the same as that in Award No. 6716, involving a similar claim on this property at Spring Lake, N. J.

In conformity with the findings in Award No. 6716, due to the consolidation of these positions, we increased the rate of pay of the Agent-Operator at South Amboy from $2.02 to $2.09 per hour, and the Agent-Operator at Matawan from $2.05 to $2.24 per hour, both effective September 10, 1956.

In consideration of the facts contained herein, namely:

(1) Violation of the provisions of Article V (b) of the August 21, 1954 National Agreement in the handling of this dispute on the property by the employes;

(2) The employes have not cited any articles of their controlling agreement having been violated in the consolidation of these positions;

This claim should be denied in its entirety.

The Carrier affirmatively states that all data contained herein has been presented to the employes' representatives.

OPINION OF BOARD: Petitioner has withdrawn from this Board that part of the Claim which relates to South Amboy. We pass upon the merits of the Claim only insofar as it relates to occurrences at Matawan.

Effective September 18, 1956, Carrier abolished the position of Freight Agent at Matawan, New Jersey. A Ticket-Agent-Operator position at Car--

rier's passenger station at Matawan was consolidated with the abolished Freight Agent position and the supervision of the Freight Agency was assigned to the Ticket-Agent-Operator.

Petitioner's Claim as filed with the Carrier was that Carrier's unilateral abolishment of the Freight Agent position with the transfer of duties to a Ticket-Agent-Operator was a violation of the Telegraphers' Agreement. In the claim Petitioner did not cite any particular provision of the Agreement as having been violated.

In the course of processing the Claim on the property, and after the initial denial of the Claim, Petitioner argued that a substantial portion of the work of the abolished Freight Agent position was being performed by clerks.

Both parties have cited a multitude of Awards pointing out conflicts and distinguishing besides citing with favor. These have all been studied; and, from the study we conclude that the following extraction from Award No. 11294 is prevailing precedent:

"As stated in Award 6022, there are two principles so well established there is no occasion for citing awards supporting them that must be given consideration in determining the rights of the parties under the confronting facts as we have construed them. The first is that except insofar as it has restricted itself by the Agreement the assignment of work necessary for its operation lies within the Carrier's discretion. The second is that in the absence of any rules of the Agreement precluding it from doing so, it is the prerogative of management, so long as it actually intends to accomplish such a result, to abolish a position if a substantial part of the work thereof has disappeared."

The issue in this case is whether a "substantial part" of the work of the Freight Agent position remained after its abolishment.

It is uncontradicted that the supervisory duties of the Freight Agem, were assigned to the Ticket-Agent-Operator.

As to whether a substantial part of the work of the Freight Agent position remained and was performed after its abolishment the only evidence in the record is the result of a joint check made on one day following the abolishment. This shows that clerks performed only fifty-two minutes per day of work formerly performed by the Freight Agent. While this joint check was conducted at the request of Petitioner-and Petitioner does not deny its accuracy--it attempts to disparage it.

Regardless of any probative value being attached to the joint check we find that Petitioner has not proven by a preponderance of evidence, in the record, that a substantial part of the work of the Freight Agent position remained and was performed by clerks after that position had been abolished. We will, therefore, deny the Claim.

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 the Carrier did not violate the Agreement.

AWARD