(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes ( (Formerly Transportation-Communication Employees Union) PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Maine Central Railroad Company Portland Terminal Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Transportation-Com
 munication Employees Union on the Maine Central Railroad
 Company (Portland Terminal Company), that:

 1. The Carrier violated the Provisions to the Rules of the Agreement and also the Mutual Agreeme Terminal Company and the Order of Railroad Telegraphers dated August 10, 1960 when effective March 30, 1968 it blanked the position of first trick Telegrapher at Rigby "PN" Office on Saturdays and transferred the work to the operator at Tower Two and the Clerical field.

 2. The Carrier shall be required to compensate the senior idle extra employee on the Portland Terminal spare board, or if no extra employee available, then the regular occupant of the first trick Operator in this office, at the appropriate rate of pay.

OPINION OF BOARD: This dispute involves a contention by the Organization that
 Carrier violated the agreement beginning Saturday, March 30,
 1968, when it allegedly transferred work of the first trick position at "TN" of
 fice to clerical employes and a telegrapher at another office on Saturdays.

 It appears that the position in question was changed from a six-day position to one of five days, with Saturday and Sunday as rest days. Some work, however, performed by the incumbent on his work days, was required to be performed on Saturdays. Ins work, Carrier had it performed by a telegrapher at another location and a clerical employs not subje
The telegrapher regularly assigned to the first trick at "PN" office filed a claim, dated April 9, 1968, as follows:



        This claim was disallowed by the Carrier on the ground that the work was performed as prescribed by an agreement dated August 10, 1960, between the parties.


        On April 11, 1968, the General Chairman, who is also the incumbent of the first trick position at "PN" office, wrote to the Carrier protesting the change in rest days of the position.


        On April 23, 1968, a conference was held concerning the agreement of August 10, 1960, and its application to the work alleged to have been improperly assigned to clerical employes on the rest days of the telegrapher position. No agreement was reached, however, for on April 28, 1968, the General Chairman filed a formal claim which appears to include the essential elements of the claim subsequently presented t


        Under date of April 30, 1968, the Carrier wrote the General Chairman a lengthy letter covering the basic complaint. The entire "Memorandum of Agr went", dated August 10, 1960, was quoted. This document provides in pertinent part that:


              "IT IS AGREED:


              "When Telegraphers are employed and on duty at 'PN' Office, Portland Terminal Company, Rigby, Maine, the work of operating machine located in that office ... for the purpose of transmitting and receiving, will be performed by Telegraphers; at other times, such work may be performed by any other Class of Employes for other than manual communication.


              "The Parties concur that the specific work outlined herein, excluding manual communication, is n Class."


        Under date of May 7, 1968, the Carrier addressed another lengthy letter to the General Chairman in which it declined the formal claim of April 28, 1968, stating its reasons in some detail.


        The General Chairman responded on May 10, 1968, to the effect that the declination of the claim by Carrier's Superintendent was unsatisfactory and would be appealed.


        From this-point forward the record presented to the Board by the

        Petitioner, so far as it relates to further appeal on the property reveals that

        many assertions as to the intent of the agreement were made, but that no evid e

        of probative value was presented in support of those assertions.


t
                  Award Number 19331 Page 3

                  Docket Number TE-18190


It is well established that: (1) The burden of proof to support its position rests with the Petitioner; and, (2) Assertions, no matter how vehemently made, cannot be equated with such evidence.

        Accordingly, the claim will be dismissed 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 no Agreement violation is shown.


                      A W A R D


        Claim dismissed.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: h` i
 Executive Secretary

        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of July 1972.