STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: On July 1, 1958, and at least as early as January, 1942, there were two separate and distinct offices designated as Yard Office and Station located at the Carrier's yards in Springfield, Illnois, commonly referred to as Shops. These offices were located at opposite corners of the area comprising Shops, the Yard Office in the Southeastern corner while the Station was in the Northwestern corner. All positions and employes referred to herein being in Seniority District No. 2 covered by Roster No. 2. The above mentioned offices remained intact until July 16, 1958, when all positions in the two offices were, according to bulletin, issued by Superintendent Transportation & Equipment W. G. Harvey on July 9, 1958, abolished. The Bulletin reads as follows:
(a) The new position of Chief Clerk was initially published on July 9, 1958, and the due processes of the agreement followed in considering all applicants for it, including claimant Maddox. No one, including Maddox, timely contested or question that such position was not rightfully created or advertised. The local and general chairmen passively concurred in the rearrangement of work and in the publication of the new jobs and assignments -that is, until September 10, 1958 (63 days after such new assignments were published), when the General Chairman with reference to attempting to have Maddox assigned to the new Rule ls/a(b) position makes only the inference, among others, that the new position assigned to Hord is the same position previously held by Maddox, and, therefore, it should have been bulletined as fully covered and assigned to Maddox. It is significantly evident that General Chairman Campbell did not desire to make any issue with regard to the July 9, 1958, publications until after the time limits in which to do so expired. Whatever contention the organization might now have with respect to the initial publication of the new position is not only without merit, but was untimely (made on the 63rd day) and barred by their own actions, in accordance with Appendix No. 4, Article V(a), reading in pertinent part as follows:
Had Maddox, rather than Hord, been appointed to the new position, the claim here involved would obviously not be before your Board. None of the organization's contentions are supported by the rules agreement, as Maddox' old position was abolished and there are no provisions in Rule 22 granting a disappointed employe super-promotion and assignments rights to a new position. The baseless claim for an alleged Rule 22 violation, together with a defective contention for Rule 9, certainly forecloses any consideration for a fictitious wage loss on an unproven insinuation that a new $518.75 per month Rule 11/z(b) position of Chief Clerk in the combined Station-Yard Office force was the same as an abolished $19.89 per day Chief Clerk-Casbier assignment at an extinct freight and passenger station.
OPINION OF BOARD: Prior to July 16, 1958, the Carrier maintained separate facilities and separate work forces at its Freight Station and Yard Office, located at Springfield, Illinois. Claimant C. T. Maddox was the incumbent of the position of Chief Clerk and Cashier. After the above date, the Carrier re-arranged its Clerk work force at this location and the Carrier explains that the reason for making the said changes was due to a decline in work requirements. In effecting the changes, the Carrier abolished all positions of the Station and Yard forces. The Bulletin covering this action shows that seventeen (17) positions were abolished, including the position of Chief Clerk and Cashier which, previous to the change, had been occupied 12533--25 781
by Claimant Maddox. Concurrent with the above, the Carrier re-established and bulletined twelve (12) positions. Pursuant to the reorganization, the Carrier alleges that it established a new position as Chief Clerk, station yard office, in compliance with Rule 1'/z (b) of the Agreement.
There were eight applicants for this position, including Claimant. The position in issue was assigned to a Mr. Hord, who admittedly had greater seniority than Maddox, but had previously been the incumbent of another position located thirty (30) miles away, and who, it appears, was not affected on his prior position by the changes described above.
Petitioner claims, inter aria, that the changes made were set in motion by the Carrier with the motive of awarding the position to Hord at the expense of Maddox arbitrarily, in violation of certain rules of the Agreement. The Carrier resists this contention of the Organization, and counters with a denial of any bad faith motivation on its part and states that the changes made were due to a decline in work requirements.
While the evidence in the case is in hopeless conflict on many points, certain salient facts emerge as follows:
Applying those items which appear to have evidentiary foundation as facts in the record to the requirements of Rule 22, we find that the instant case falls squarely within the said Rule, for the following reasons: