(Marion Dooley PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Robert W. Blanchette, Richard C. Bond, ( and John H. McArthur, Trustees of the ( Property of Penn Central Transportation ( Company, Debtor

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules
 of the National Railroad Adjustment Board of my
 intention to file an ex parte submission on April 1, 1976, covering an
 unadjusted dispute between Mr. Marion Dooley and the Penn Central Railroad
 involving the question of whether or not the carrier violated the rules
 agreement effective February 1, 1968 when it failed on the effective
 date of the merger agreement to recall the claimant, Mr. Marion Dooley
 from furlough status as provided in the provisions of the merger agreement.

 OPINION OF BOARD: The claim in this case is premised upon Carrier's
 failure to recall Claimant Marion Dooley from
 furlough on the effective date of the Merger Agreement, February 1, 1968.
 The Claimant was employed March 29, 1941 as a Group II employe on the
 former New York Central and was furloughed July 13, 1962, and has
 performed no service since that date.

 The claim was initiated by the filing of a dispute on February 26, 1973, with the Superintendent-Labor Relations, and then progressed to the highest designated officer, where it was denied for procedural reasons and on the merits. The Carrier argues the claim is procedurally defective because it was not submitted to the proper officer pursuant to Rule 7-B-1(a), which requires that claims must be submitted "to the employe's immediate supervisor."

 The record established that the Superintendent-Labor Relations is the second-tier management official responsible for handling claims under Rule 7-B-1, and his responsibilities are limited to appeals from decisions of the "immediate supervisor." Claims are not instituted with the Superintendent-Labor Relations as part of the "usual manner of handling grievances"; consequently the express requirements of Rule 7-B-1(a) and Sec,tion 3, First (i) of the Railway Labor Act have not been satisfied in ths.case.


        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

        The Agreement was not violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim dismissed.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division

ATTEST: 4ociv. fial4o~
        Executive Secretary


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

                                0V: C~,

                                YL , ~1 111~1


                                DEr, 01 1977


                                SEF:rt