(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline 6 Steamship Clerks,
 ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Duluth, Misuabe and Iron Range Railway Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhhod (6926) that:

 (1) The Carrier violated the effective Agreement, specifically Rule 1, Scope, and Rule 2, Definition of Clerical Workers, when work of Carrier employes of this Craft and Class was performed by Supervisory employes of the Carrier.

 (2) Claimant John L. Tronadal shall now be compensated for 8 hours' pay at the rate of time and one-half for each date November 24, 25, and 27, and December 9, 1969; Claimant L. L. Mattson for 8 hours' pay at the rate of time and one-half for each date November 24, 26 and 27, 1969; and Claimant J. W. Hedin for 8 hours' pay at the rate of time and one-half for each date November 25 and 26, 1969.

 OPTNION OF BOARD: This claim is based on an alleged violation by Carrier in
 permitting supervisory personnel to perform Clerk's work at
 the Carrier's ore dock office at Duluth, Minnesota.

 Claimants were holders of Input-output technicians positions. In October and November of 1969, Carrier reduced substantially the number of InputOutput technician pos 24, 1969, supervisory personnel performed certain functions on the claim dates that Claimants allege was routine clerk's work. They urge that the force reduction resulted in Claim the Carrier to let supervisory personnel detect and handle input errors on the 1050 machine.

 The Carrier responds that the work complained of was "in addition to and not in lieu of the normal routine of the input-Output technicians duties".

 During the handling on the property the Carrier responded in detail to the Claimant's allegations. The record reveals a lengthy explanation of the Carrier's actions. Specifically the Carrier's Superintendent stated that errors iA vessel shipment statenents in late November prompted the Carrier to send supervisory personnel to th to re-establish valid current records and do comparison and analysis work co determine the corrections necessary for current and prior shipments. The Superintendent further stat overtime work to rmke the necessary corrections directed by supervisory personnel.


The record does not reflect that on the property the Claimants put forth anything but a general allegation that the work performed by the supervisory personnel was part of the regular clerical routine duties at the Duluth ore docks. This is not' sufficient. It is incumbent upon the Claimants in order that they sus
        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived bral hearing;


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

        That the claim should be dismissed.


                      A W A R D


                    ~ T


        Claim dismissed for lack of proof.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 22nd day of June 1972.