(Marie Hoover PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The National Railroad Passenger Corporation

 STATEMENT CF CLALM: I am appealing =j claim to you for $1.60 per day for
 each day beginning march 11, 1976, on which date my
 rate of pay was reduced, and continuing until such time as the job I am
 holding, which the Company chose to advertise and award in accordance
 with the provisions of Rule 6 of the BRAC/Amtrak Agreement, specifically
 showing the Title of Position as "Commissary Worker Job T13, Lead," is
 abolished, etc.

 OPITIION OF BOARD: Claimant in this case was assigned to a position
 of Lead Commissary Worker at Carrier's Chicago,
 Illinois Dining Car facility. By letter dated March 10, 1976, she vas
 informed that the "Lead" designation was being removed from her position.
 The Claim as outlined in the JTATEMNT OF CLAIM resulted.

 The controlling Rules Agreement provisions in this dispute are Rule 1(C) and Appendix "B". Rule 1(C) provides:

Appendix "B" is a list of Partially Excepted Positions, which includes, among others:

From the record in this case, it is apparent that the action as taken by Carrier was permitted by the language of the applicable Rules. Applying the facts in this dispute, the Board finds the Carrier has the license to assign and/or remove employes from "lead" positions without regard to the provisions of Rules 5, 6 and 10. We have no alternative but to apply the Agreement as drafted by the parties. See Award Nos. 21182, 20383, 19815, 18471 and 12558.
 A-,card Number 22088
 .Docket ?dumber AS-21979

 :age 2

 Detitioner cannot i1 this instance rely on pre'T'ious bul-leti_^_
 i:.g of the "lead" position and argue that "past practices can inaeed
 alter or amend the written terms of a collective bargaining agreement".
 The Board does not agree. 4nere, as here, the language of the Rule is
 clear and unambiguous, no amount oz contrary past practice can change
 such language. The Board has consistently so ruled. See Award ?ics.
 Nos. 21130, 20643, 18064 and 14115. - - _

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Ad jus t=ent Board, after giving
 the parties to this dispute due notice of hearing there
 on, and upon the :.hole record and a:1, the evidence, finds and holds:

 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 Agreement was not vicla-ced'.

 Claim denied.

ATTEST: 9U-4Z-=--W



:TATIODIAL RAILROAD ADJUSTIENT BOARD

By Order of Third Division


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of 2~ay 1978.