(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and ( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, ( Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Robert W. Blanchette, Richard C. Bond ( and John H. McArthur, Trustees of the ( Property of Penn Central Transportation ( Company, Debtor

(a) The Carrier violated the Rules Agreement, effective February 1, 1968, particularly Extra List Agreement 20 (O), Rule 5-C-1 and other rules when it assigned Station Department employees the clerical duties of checking outbound tracks at Shire Oaks, Pennsylvania yard, matching waybills with cars and generating required data origination messages on same.

 (b) The following named claimants be allowed eight (8) hours at the pro rata monthly rate of $869.30 for each of the dates indicated account of the violation:

























OPINION OF BOARD : Claimant alleges that on the claim dates, Carrier
 did not utilize employes on Extra List 20(0) to
 check cars (matching way bills with cars and generating required data
 origination message) in Shire Oaks Yard, nor did it use regularly
 assigned clerks entitled to be called for work protected by Extra List
 20(0), when said list is exhausted. Rather, it utilized regularly
 assigned clerks who were employed at the Clairton Station Department,
 who had to travel 7 miles to Shire Oaks to perform the duties.

        Claimant cites Rule 5-C-1:


        "Where extra employes are used extra boards will be established by agreement between the appropriate officer of the company and the Division Chairman. The number of extra employes to be used and the manner in which they will work will be determined by written agreement between the appropriate officer of the company and the Division Chairman."


and asserts that List 20(0) was established thereunder to serve the territory here under consideration. The employes also refer to asserted violations of Rules 4-A-1(i), 2-A-1, and 4-C-1.

 An integral ingredient to the Employes' claim is that Clairtonbased employes "checked tracks" and "c and they assert that Carrier's October 20, 1972 instruction confirms that assertion. Carrier disagrees, and asserts that the work in question was limited to the regular performance of duty by Clairton employes.

 As we read the October 20, 1972 document, it instructs employes to "pickup" the wheel report. We see nothing in the document, or elsewhere in the record, which demonstrates that the employes, "checked cars", "checked track", etc.

 Based upon our review of this record, we do not concur with Claimant's assertion that Carrier failed to challenge "factual assertions" while the matter was under review on the property.

 The.Employes violently disagree that nothing but "messenger service" was involved in this dispute. Be that as it may, this Board can only assess - and rule on - evidence of record; we may not engage in speculation. We are inclined to dismiss the claim based upon the Claimant's failure to sustain the burden of proof that the work was, in fact, performed in the manner alleged.
                    Award Number 21658 Page 3

                    Docket Number CL-21440


        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 claim be dismissed.


                    A W A R D


        Claim dismissed for failure of proof.


                          NATIONAL. RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~ / ,
 xecutive Secretary.

                          i


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 18 th day of August 1977.