NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

THIRD DIVISION

(Supplemental)




PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: You are hereby notified of my intention to file an ex parte submission against the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, to-wit, September 1, 1967. The claim against the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company is in connection with the authorized coordination of that Company with the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, the claim arises from

1. Termination of claimant's over twenty-one years of excepted secretarial employment as of December 1, 1963, with deprivation of earned employment rights and benefits-without awarding claimant the protection and compensation benefits then in effect and required to be provided for employes adversely affected in their employment.



3. Mistakes of law; failure of the Arbitration Board to adjudicate the claim properly; to comply with the provisions of the Railway Labor Act; failure of the Arbitration Board to apply the "Washington Job Agreement" to the claimant; and failure of the Arbitration Board to render an intelligible opinion and a clear-cut and interpretable award.



I hereby request the Board to determine my employment rights and status by declaring as a nullity the arbitration procedure undergone, and allowing me the right to arbitrate, or, in lieu thereof, to definitely interpret the award and opinion and clarify my status thereunder.

OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant had occupied the position of Secretary to Assistant Regional Engineer at Pittsburgh for many years, an "excepted" position, not subject to the basic agreement in effect between the Clerks' organization and the Carrier. Claimant's position was abolished by the Carrier on November 23, 1963, in what the Carrier contended was solely an economy move. Claimant contended that the abolishment was a result of acquisition by the C&O of control of the B&0 and therefore she should have been granted certain considerations provided for employes who were "placed in a worse position . . . as a result" of the acquisition of control.


In due course, and in strict compliance with the employe-protection provisions embodied in Article VIII of the Order of the I.C.C. permitting the acquisition of control above described, the questions of Claimant's rights and status were submitted to "final, binding and conclusive" arbitration, the neutral member and Chairman of the Arbitration Committee having been appointed by a judge of the United States District Court. The record establishes that the Board of Arbitration convened, rendered an award after hearing, and thereafter the terms of the award were fully complied with.


By this proceeding, we are asked to review the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Board, as well as the merits of the award rendered thereby, to which Claimant voluntarily submitted her complaint for "final, binding and conclusive" arbitration. Under these circumstances, we are not competent to proceed and the claim must be dismissed.


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.









Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of April 1969.

 Keenan Printing Co., Chicago, Ill. Printed in U.S.A.
 17058 2