(Albert Taylor
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (The Cincinnati Union Terminal Company

According to the Job Annual Wage Stabilization, we are guaranteed a forty-hour week but we are not getting it. I am receiving Railroad Unemployment Compensation, $12.70 per day. That makes a total of $127.00 every two weeks. I also understand that the Company is supposed to supplement the pay as they are doing at the Dayton Terminal Company. But they are not doing that in Cincinnati Terminal Company, since my termination.

 Due to mail declination, the Company has not paid the Separation Allowance they're supposed to. Agreement.

 Also as a member of the Brotherhood of Railway Clerks and Station Employees (AFL/CIO) Local 207, Union of which Mr. T. C. Burch is General Chairman.

 Sir, at your earliest convenience, will you look into the matter. An oral hearing is desired;

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, Albert Taylor, personally handled this claim on
 the property and received an oral hearing in regard to
 said claim from Mr. Robert Goeke, Carrier's Personnel Supervisor.

 Mr. Taylor personally filed this claim with this Board alleging that the claim involved is the February Seventh Agreement (February 7, 1965 Job Stabilization Agreement) and that under Section (3) thereof, (Article 1, Section 3), Carrier is required to supplement its pay to its employes, which it is not doing; Claimant is receiving Railroad Unemployment Compensation of $12.70 per day, or $127.00 every two weeks; that Carrier is required to pay a separation allowance, which it is not doing; that referring to the type of business set forth under Section (3) (Article I, Section 3), Carrier has no ton miles to be used in reduction of forces, and thus Carrier could not abolish any positions without this supplemental Agreement.
                  Docket Number MS-19214


Carrier challenges the jurisdiction of this Board to hear this dispute claiming that the proper forum for hearing such a dispute as is involved herein is before th Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the February 7, 1965 Job Stabilization Agreement.

 With this contention, we agree. Claimant is relying solely on the application of the February 7, 1965 Job Stabilization Agreement, claiming that Carrier violated it in this instance. Thus, since the said February 7, 1965 Job Stabilization Agreement provides the machinery for handling disputes such as is involved herein, therefore the proper forum for the determination of this dispute is said "Disput prejudice.

 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 without prejudice.


                      A W A R D


        Claim dismissed without prejudice.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


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