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

(1) Carrier violated the Agreement effective July 12, 1977, when it arbitrarily and unilaterally changed the assigned duties on the position of Porter at Fitzgerald, Ga., to include driving Company vehicle (and hauling crews) without properly negotiating the rate of pay and classification of same.

 (2) As a consequence of this violation, Carrier shall be required to compensate Claimant R. A. Morgan the rate of $53.97 per day which is the present rate of pay paid Porter Drivers as is evidenced by Lines 27 and 32 on current seniority roster for the Atlanta Division, seniority district dated July 1, 1977, commencing August 1, 1977, and continuing for him, his relief and/or successor for each subsequent day so long as the violation continues. Additionally, Carrier shall be required to properly negotiate the rate and duties of this position to properly conform to the duties the incumbent thereof is required to perform.

 OPINION OF BOARD: When the prior incumbent of the porter's position at
 Fitzgerald, Georgia retired, Carrier advertised a
 "Porter-Driver" position. But, on the next day a corrected bulletin was
 issued as a "Porter" position. Claimant asserts that the rate paid
 ($47.93 per day) is improper because the duties required are identical to
 those performed by other Porter-Drivers on the same division ($53.97).

 Ihile 31 specifies that positions - not employes - are rated and Rule 34 mandates that wages for new positions shall conform to similar positions in the seniority district. Thus, the Employes allege a violation because "... Carrier added to the assignment of Porter, the duties of driving company vehicles and transporting crews ..."

 Carrier conceded, while the matter was being handled ow-the property, that when the former incumbent retired, the duty of transporting crews was added to the job requirements. But - Carrier stresses - this type of activity


is better described as "lower rated work". It is also conceded that the prior incumbent could not operate a motor vehicle.

 Some two (2) months prior to forwarding an intention to file an Ex Parts submission to this Division, the Vice General Chairman noted that four (4) Porter-Driver positions in the seniority district received $53.97. Although Carrier admits that the assigned duties of the July 13 bulletin were not altered from those contained in the July 12 "Porter-Driver" bulletin, it did not, on the property, dispute the assertion regarding the four (4) positions referred to above. To be sure, in its Submission the Carrier asserts that there are "... other differences in the duties . resulting in different rates of pay" and it seeks to demonstrate certain factual events. But this Board has held in numerous Awards over the years that we are not constituted to consider - and base Awards upon - matters raised for the first time in the Submission to this Board. Normally that rule is invoked to prevent an attempt to add a basic ingredient necessary to support a claim; but the rule is equally applicable to bar an attempt to add a defense to a claim.

        Thus, we are required to limit our consideration solely to the

matters raised and considered on the property. Regardless of motivations
 and the "higher" or "lower" rated assertions this record suggests a new
 position and under this record our knowledge is limited to the fact that
 the July 13 bulletin was identical (except for title) to the "Porter-Driver"
 position listed on July 12, and the fact that other such positions in the
 district receive the higher rate. Limited solely to this record we sustain
 the claim.

        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 Agreement was violated.

                      Award Number 22996 Page 3

                      Docket Number CL-22737

                      A W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: Al, A&~

        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of September 1980.