Joseph E. Cole, Referee


      (James E. Saul PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

                  (Norfolk and Western Railway Company


      STATEMENT OF CLAIM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of the

      National Railroad Adjustment Board, of my intentions to file an ex parte submission on February 10th 1972 covering an unadjusted dispute between me and the Norfo


      I am claiming one day (8) hours at time and one half at the rate of $735.39 per month for each of the following dates. April 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, and 30th. May 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, and 29, 1971 for violation of rules #1-2-35-6-36-38-39-49 and 65


      On each of the above dates, I was removed by you from my regular assigned position of Billing Clerk 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. Tuesday through Sat-day, with Sunday and ;osition of Teletype Clerk 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. which is regularly assigned to work Sunday through Thursday, with Friday and Saturday as assigned days of rest.


            No oral hearing is requested in this submission.


      OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, James E. Saul, Clerk, employed by the Norfolk &


      Western Railway Company at the Portsmouth Scale Office, Portsmouth, Ohio, filed his own claim an alleging violation of Rules 1, Scope Rule; 2, Seniority Districts; 3, Seniority; 6, Exercise of Seniority; 36, Overtime; 39, Authorizing Overtime; 49, Established Rates and Positions; and 65, Effective Date and Changes, of the Clerks' Master Agreement.


      After setting out his claim for eight (8) hours' pay at time and onehalf for thirty-four (34) da


            "On each of the above dates, I was removed by you from my regular assigned position of Billing C Tuesday through Saturday, with Sunday and Monday as my regular assigned days of rest, to fill the position of Teletype Clerk 3:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. which is regularly assigned to work Sunday through Thursday, with Friday and Saturday as assigned days of rest."


~z~
                  Award Number 19302 Page 2

                  Docket Number MS-19615


On appeal through the various appeal steps the allegation was repeated. It was not enlarged upon how Claimant was, in fact, performing duties of another position, or that he was, in fact, removed from his regular assigned position. The entire record in this dispute has been carefully analysed, and it is our opinion that all this Board has before it is Petitioner's claim that he was removed from his regularly assigned position and was required to perform the duties of another position. Claimant has not submitted proof supporting these two allegations.

 The Carrier has denied that Claimant was removed from his position or that he performed duties other than the duties assigned to his position.

 Inasmuch as no proof supporting Claimant's allegations are in the record, we are left with no alternative but to dismiss the claim for lack of proof.

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral 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 be dismissed for lactic of proof.


                    A W A R D


        Claim dismissed for lack of proof.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of June 1972.