(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship
 ( Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and
 ( Station Employes
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (George P. Baker, Richard C. Bond and Jervis
 ( Langdon, Jr., Trustees of the Property of
 ( Penn Central Transportation Company, Debtor

(a) The Carrier violated the Rules Agreement, effective February 1, 1968, particularly Rule 7-B-1, when claim dated March 31, 1969, submitted by L. D. Weller, Furloughed Clerk, Chesapeake Division, Eastern Region, was not denied or allowed.

 (b) L. D. Weller be restored to service and be allowed the
 benefits claimed. (Docket 2627)

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant urges a violation of Rule 7-B-1 because
 Carrier neither denied nor allowed his March 31,
 1969 claim.

 There is considerable controversy between the parties concerning the timeliness and validity of recognize the very serious nature of the question of time limits in prosecuting claims and grievances, we feel that this docket must be disposed of on jurisdictional grounds.

 The March 31, 1969 Notice of Claim, which is quite expertly drawn, initially sets forth certain factual allegations. and then states:



I
                    "Implementing Agreement failed to continue the employment relationship of this claimant. This ac the part of the carrier was to this claimant's detriment.


                    Wherefore, the foregoing premises considered, claimant seeks appropriate relief under Section 9 of the Washington Job Protection Agreement of 1936."


              Not only does Claimant fail to cite any alleged violation of the Rules Agreement; he directly and specifically requests relief under Section 9 of the Washington Job Protection Agreement.


              Of course, this Board has no jurisdiction to consider an alleged violation of the Interstate Coerce Act. Regarding asserted violations of the Merger Agreement and implementing agreements, with a request for relief under the Washington Job Protection Agreement, we note that Section 13 of said Agreement states:


                    "Section 13. In the event that any dispute or controversy arises (except as defined in Section 1 interpretation, application or enforcement of any of the provisions of this agreement (or of the agreement entered into between the carriers and the representatives of the employees relating to said coordina as contemplated by this agreement) which is not composed by the parties thereto within thirty days after same arises, it may be referred by either party for consideration and determination to a Committee which established, composed in the first instance of the signatories to this agreement. Each party to this may name such persons from time to time as each party desires to serve on such Committee as its representatives in substitution for such original members. Should the Committee be unable to agree, it shall select a neutral referee and in the event it is unable to agree within 10 days upon the selection of said referee, then the members on either side may request the National Mediation Board to appoint a referee. The case shall again be considered by the Committee and the referee and the decision of the referee shall be final and conclusive. The salary and expenses of the referee shall be borne equally by the parties to the proceeding; all other expenses shall be paid by the party incurring them."

              Award Number 20289 Page 3

              Docket Number CL-20314


The Board has recently reaffirmed that when an Agreement contains specific provision for resolution of disputes by an Arbitration Committee, this Board will See Awards 19926 and 19950. See also Awards 17639, 16869 and 14471.

        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 Board lacks jurisdiction over this dispute.


                  A W A R D


        Claim dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.


                        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        xec~ut*ve Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of June 1974.
 L30R iu::~·:R~S DIOS''_iT TO Gi.T'P_:;D 2028111 r3 Xm t_, 37.4)
 (Referee SIc:-les)

          The sole i::::ue to be decided in this dispute was


~:hothor o-' root ic;::i;:,- ~,·iolaedrticla V of thn "'ugust 21,

 1 954 Mgr ec:.T:i:, ~.1! of the fo? l o;.rang Awards ta;',·o held that

 Carriar cannot pro,;~=:,e the clr__:; and r,-f_%-3 to handle it

 in ~ccoT·cF^n:;e With oho .'..-raer:-_nt proviaicnc:

            .'.Era:' F-,r~'e:9e


              ,7E,p

              na;i'"%nd P. L Dri er c


            1Ci_)V1 J. :T':'7° L ,.'_'r

            i:

            1050`) ~(1l'DDVi 1% · ;=Vi ll

            111' ·= ' ,-

            1) :; d o_.i ~.o

            12233 Nathan r:~,~icct6-in

            -~.n'<< < -

            124')3 J.o-ph C. ::c.n.^.

            12L; 7!y. JO ::c:F;i S. :;_-nc

            .lro ,

            lU. ~: M"-m ~ Ri:;t_;~

            165^I; Jc!:n F:. f.:r> ::~-

            r n. J

            19799 Prenerick i:. i)lcct_:.e~a


I1ot havinF, o ospondod to the ~l.c_i·~9 Car;ILT· dofcul;;cd under tF:c

 ti".3 li:Tif: proviaicns Of A:·ticlo V, end the Clai=-: should have

 been aliowed "=;: p:·ccont;ed". ~~etion 13 of tho ..a:hinaton
                                            J

Job °rotsctica .1g:·cercnt was ;;c,ccndary u:der ccc,'circumstancos and, thoreforo, should not have coon given :!oigiit in the disposition cf the matter.

        For the above reason::, tI n':';nt.

                        / 1, l/


s~%J · /'1,l F 1 01..^.~'lur

^. lisi

L~:oo. .. nb~r

                        7)'1/74

                  CARRIER MEMBERS' ANA TO LABOR MEMBER'S DISSENT To AWARD N0. 20289 - (DOCKET NO CL 20314) REFEREE sICKLEg


            The labor member's dissent covers the same argument used in panel discussion.


                  The Neutral in Award No. 20289 stated;


                      "Not only does Claimant fail to cite any alleged violation of the Rules Agreement; he directly and specificially requests relief under Section 9 of the Washington Job Protection Agreement."


            The Neutral, in Award No. 20289, correctly found that the claim should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction inasmuch as the Washington Job Protection Agreement contains specific provision for resolution of disputes by a committee designated under Section 13 thereof.


                                                  w,~ o


                                  R. F. M. Braid wood


                                  P. C. Carter


                                    l

                                  W. B. Jones


                                  G. L. Naylor


                                      7


j~' a. M. Youhn