(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship ( Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and ( Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

 STAT T OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood
 (GL-7314) that:

 1. Carrier violated Rules 1 and 5 as well as other related rules of the Clerks' Agreement, at Salem Street Office, commencing September 14, 1971, when they unilaterally transferred work assigned to a position covered by our rules agreement to an employe not covered, and

 2. Carrier be required to compensate Mr. E. E. Gould eight (8) hours pay for September 14, 15, 29, and 30; October 14, 15, 29, and 30; and four (4) hours September 16; October 1, 16, and 28; as well as four (4) hours on November 1, 1971 and

 3. Carrier be required to compensate Claimant Gould for each day the violation continues and/or his successors as set forth in Employes' Exhibit "A".

 OPINION OF BOARD: The claim of the Petitioner is that Carrier "uni
 laterally transferred work assigned to a position
 covered by our rules agreement to an employe not covered."

 It appears that the work complained of is work performed by the Division Accountant, which position was established at LaFayette, Indiana, shortly after the Monon Railroad was acquired by and became a part of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company.

 The Carrier contends that the Division Accountant at LaFayette performs the same type of work performed by other Division Accountants, primarily to check time returns and distribution for accuracy, and that he reports directly to and is under the jurisdiction of the ManagerDisbursements Accounting. The Car Accountant performs the work of the Chief Clerk, the claimant herein.

 We have reviewed the entire record and find no proof whatsoever by the Petitioner that work cove assertions do not constitute proof. The checking of records for accuracy by officers and other non-agreement covered personnel is not a violation of Agreements.


The Petitioner relies upon early Awards Nos. 1209 and 1210. We have reviewed those awards and find that they cover entirely different situations where positions actual transfer of work. In the present case no positions were abol-
 ished and there is no probative evidence of a transfer of work. The claim must be denied.



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
That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and






                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
 Executive Secretary

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of March 1974.

 .i