THE CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY
(Chesapeake District)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company (Chesapeake District) that:
EMPLOYES' STATEMENT OF FACTS: With the close of work May 3, 1968, Foreman C. E. Deane's position on the Carrier's Clifton Forge Division was abolished. Foreman Deane exercised displacement rights to a leading signalman's position in system Gang No. 796 effective May 6, 1968, displacing M. P. Hughes, who in turn displaced the junior signalman in System Gang No. 796.
The present dispute arose when the Carrier advised signalman R. M. Black that he was being considered the junior signalman in System Gang No. 796, notwithstanding that J. W. Furrow was actually junior to signalman Black. Carrier further advised Mr. Black that he would be provided employment as a signal helper in System Gang No. 796, effective May 6, 1968. The dispute
The General Chairman of the Organization (Leading Signalman Hughes) contended that when he, Hughes, displaced the junior Signalman on System Force No. 796, that junior Signalman was Furrow not Claimant Black,
The claim, as shown in Statement of Claim above, was filed and has been handled through the procedural steps on the property, being declined by Carrier's Highest Officer designated to handle such disputes under date of October 7, 1968.
OPINION OF BOARD: This claim arose out of a series of displacements which resulted in Claimant a signalman, being required to place himself on a signal helper position while a junior employe, protected, was retained as a signalman,
Carrier contends that since the junior employe, a protected employe, was occupying a "make-work" position, he was not subject to the operation of the seniority rules.
Here, like in Award 18022, adopted this date, the basic issue had been decided in Award 17615, which we follow here and will sustain the claim.
FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectivedy 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