(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, (Freight Handlers and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Georgia Railroad

1. The Carrier has violated and continues tc violate the Clerks' Agreement, effective May 1, 1942, as amended, and the February 7, 1965 National Agreement, particularly Articles III and VIII thereof, beginning on Monday, May 8, 1967, when it abolished the position of Clerk, Thomson, Georgia Agency and transferred the work thereof to employes who are not subject to the aforementioned agreements, a
2. The Carrier shall now be required to return the work of the Clerks' position at Thomson, Georgia Agency as hereinafter specified to employes within the scope of the said Clerks' Agreement, and

 3. Clerk Z. B. Wilson, Clerk C. M. Reese at Camak, Georgia Agency, the then occupant of the First Trick Clerk's position at Camak, Georgia, and/or any and all other employes who have been adversely affected by the Carrier's illegal action, shall be compensated in full for all salary, wage and other losses sustained by him or them from the time he or they have been adversely affected and continuing thereafter until the complained of violation has been corrected, and that

 4. The successor or successors in interest, if any, of the above named and/or referred to employes shall be compensated in like manner, and that

 5. The records of the Carrier shall be checked jointly with the General Chairman to determine the extent of salary, wage and/or other compensational losses due each
OPINION OF BOARD: The dispute herein originated with the abolishment by
 Carrier of a clerical position at Thomson, Ga., and the alleged transfer of work to employes not covered by the Clerks' Agreement.

 The Petitioner relies primarily on the Scope Rule of the Agreement, and also cites the February 7, 1965, Job Stabilization Agreement.


The Scope Rule is of the general type in that it does nit delineate work. It is well settled that under such rule as this one, if the Petitioner is to prevail it must p the work complained of is reserved to employes covered by the Agreement on a system-wide basis. See Awards 12956 and 19187 involving the same parties. In the record before us the Petitioner has not met the burden of proof required of it. We will, therefore, deny the claim.

 While the Petitioner cites the February 7, 1965 Job Stabilization Agreement, if a dispute exists involving the interpretation and application of that Agreement, the forum to resolve it is the Disputes Committee established under that Agreement. See Awards 16552, 15696 and 14979.

        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 Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of July 1972.