(Lyle Kreuter PARTIES TO DISPUTE: ('

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of the
 National Railroad Adjustment Board of my intention to file an ex parte submission on (30 days from date of this notice) covering as unadjusted dispute between
Due to improper action and/or inaction of J. P. Crozier Mgr. RE& Express 1310 Kishwaukee St. Chapman, Regional Mgr. I have suffered loss of wages and work,from September 30, 1970 thru March 24, 1971.

 A position to which I should have been entitled under rule #3 paragraph I of our working agreement was awarded to a junior man. My repeated requests t· be qualified (by the comvany, a test for said position) were ignored by Mr. Crozier, and former Mgr.
On November 13, 1970 Mr. Chapman ordered a senior man to fill such a position, without being qualified (or taking the Co. test) as a result I am still layed off while a junior man is working. It is my opinion that in order to rectify this, I should be reimbursed for work lost and given a chance to qualify.

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant herein, L. Kreuter, contends that he should have been
 awarded a position of tractor-trailer driver which Carrier assigned to a junior employee. There is a conflict in the evidence as to whether Claimant filed a bid for the position. Carrier contends that he did not while Claimant avers that he did. It is well settled that in cases before this Board the burden of proving the case rests with Claimant/Petitioner. The mere assertion that he had bid fo Carrier's submission, does not, without more, constitute evidence which will prove that the bid was made. Moreover, the record reveals that Claimant failed to pass a qualifying test given him by Carrier on March 24, 1971. The Organization's local representative was present at the location where the test was given. Neither the Organization's representative nor the Claimant produced any evidence to show that the test was unfair or improperly administered. Claimant suggests, but does not prove, that his disqualification as a result of the test was an attempt to nullify any award of wages allegedly due as a result of Carrier's alleged failure to appoint him to the posi tesc was unfair. Nor does the mere fact that he was subsequently qualified by a test given him by Carrier on June 29, 1971 prove that the test in March was unfair or irregular,

 As Claimant has not sustained his burden the Claim must be dismissed for lack of proof


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; and



        Claim dismissed.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division

ATTEST:/ D~ ,

        Executive Secret


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