Irwin M. Lieberman, Referee


          (Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steaviship Clerks,

          Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employee w

          PARTIES TO DISPUTE;

          (J. F; Nash and R. C. Haldeman, Trustees bf the P2operty

          ( of Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, Debtor '


                      STA.T^:l'".^r OF CLAIM; Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-7023) that:


          (a) Carrier violated the Agreement between the parties effective May 1, 1955, as revised, when it abolished position of Clerk-Stenographer at Buffalo, New York, and then re-advertised the same position as a new position at a lower rate of pay than the established rate.


          (b) Carrier shall now be required to restore the established rate of this position, plus subsequent wage increases.


          (c) Carrier shall now be required to pay Sylvia M. Wheeler, the proper rate of this position from July 10, 1970, up to and including such time as this violation is corrected.


          OPINION OF BOA1;n; The position of clerk-stenographer, held by an employee about

          to retire, was abolished by notice dated July 1, 1970; That

          position paid $692.22. A new position of clerk-stenographer was advertised on

          July 3, 1970 and awarded to Claimant by Assignment dated July 10, 1970. That posi

          tion paid $574.10 per month. Although the descriptions of the two positions were

          virtually identical, the Carrier maintained that the abolishment was due to !'elim

          ination of all chief clerk work on this assignment". The Carrier claimed that

          the original incuruSent had supervisory responsibilities which accounted for the

          higher rate of pay.


                Rule 56 of the Agreement states:


                "Rule 56 Adjustment of Rates;. When there is a sufficient increase or decrease in the duties and responsibilities of a position or change in the character of the service required, the compensation for such position will be subject to adjustment by mutual agreement with the duly accredited representative, but established positions will not be discontinued and new ones created under the same or different titles covering relatively the some class or grade of work, which will have the effect of reducing the rate of pay or evading the application of these rules."


                .r ,. ,.

                Award Number 19575 Page 2

                Docket Number CL-19583


The record in this case does not sustain the claim that there were substantial differences in the two positions. Even if there were occasional supervisory responsibilities, we have said in a very similar case (Award 6870) "This Hoard has long been committed to the rule that it is not necessary for an employs to take over and perform all of the duties and responsibilities of a higher rated position in order to be entitled to pay at the higher rate." In any. event Carrier did not abide with the requirements of Rule 56; Carrier did not seek mutual agreement in order to modify the compensation of the position.

        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 Employee involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employee 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 violated..


                    r1 W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secret:.:y


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of January 1973.

 v