(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Norfolk and Western Railway Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Rail
 road Signalmen on the Western Region of the Norfolk and
 Western Railway Company (former Wabash Railroad Company) that:

 (a) Carrier violated the Signalmen's Agreement, particularly the Scope and historical practice, when, on February 28, 1970, (a rest day for shop employes) persons not regularly assigned to the Signal Shop at Decatur, Illinois; i.e., Assistant Supervisor accompanied Signal Maintainer Beckham, entered the shop and obtained signal material from therein.

 (b) Carrier should now pay to Signalman 0. B. Little, who is regularly assigned to the Signal Shop,
OPTN ION OF BOARD: On Claimant's rest day, an Assistant Signal Supervisor
 unlocked Carrier's Signal Shop to permit a Signal Main
 tainer to procure certain material. Petitioner contends that said act con
 stituted a violation of the Scope Rule of the Agreement - relying upon his
 torical practice on the property.

 Carrier denies a violation, stating that Petitioner has not demonstrated an exclusive historical pra


A reading of the Scope Rule itself does not compel us to conclude that the unlocking of a door on one of Carrier's facilities is a violative act. Further, the record fails to show that any other "work" was performed. Under this Scope Rule (which does not reserve the disputed work to any one employee or group of employees), in order to find a violation, we require a showing, by means of history or custom, of an enforceable practice. The only evidence suggesting such a practice was apparently never presented to Carrier while the matter was being handled on the property and (in accordance with numerous Awards o for consideration.

 The Organization has failed to meet its burden of proving its claim by a substantive preponderance of the evidence and we must therefore dismiss it.

                  Docket L:tn'ber SG-19532


        F7idDIt&S: The Third Dirision of the Adjustc,=·,t Board, tr:on the vvi:ole rec and all the cvidence, finds and ho=i.ds:


        That the parties waived oral hesrin.-;


That the Carrier and the D~-ployes involved in Lhis dispute are respectively Carrier co:d Eamloycs witl.in the r._cning of il.e Railw^riy Labor Act, as approved June 21, ly34;

 Thct this Division of the Adjustru-nit Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the claim should be dismissed.


                        A W A R 1)


        Claim dismissed.


                            Lil.'.!.`7C:.:'.TrHI=.'.^,:D ADIOUSTI:ZT DGM

                            By Or;:<^.r of ',"gird Division


ATTEST:
            ve S-


Dated at Chicago, Z71iLois, this 20th day ofNovember 1973.