(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee
 PARTIES To DISPUTE:
 (Union Pacific Railroad Company

 STAT$M OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned an employe with no seniority in Group 14 (R. F. Wetter) to the position of track welder as advertised by Bulletin 14-B dated April 4, 1978 instead of assigning a Group 14 employe thereto (Carrier's File 013-210-19).



Ong= OF BOARD: On April 4, 1978, Carrier's Mums Division General
 Roadmmster Issued Bulletin Ho. 14-B advertising a
 vacancy of Track Welder-Arc Weld Process, seniority class (b), Group 14
 is the Track Subdepartment- Gang 3914 with headquarters at Hastings,
 Nebraska. The Carrier received three (3) bids that from the Claimant,
 L. B. Davis, a Track Welder Helper in class (fj of Group 14 with seniority
 date of December 30, 1974; that iron C. A. Fry, a Sectionman in class (a)
 of Group 17 in the Track Subdepartment, and from R. F. Wetter, also a
 Sectionman in class (a) of Group 17, Track Subdepartment with seniority
 date of July 1, 1974. Ho bids were received from employee already holding
 seniority in class (b) of Group 14 in the Track Sabdepar4sent. On date
 of April 19, 1978, Carrier issued Bulletin No. 14-C, awarding the position
 in question to R. F. Wetter instead of the Claimant.

 The Organization alleges that in not awarding the advertised position to Claimant, Carrier violated several rules of the Controlling Agreement, effective January 1, 1973, but particularly and primarily Rule 19(b) which reeds in whole as follovs:




The organization notes that it is an undisputed fact that of the three (3) employes who bid on the position in question, only the Claimant held seniority in Group 14, and therefore was the most senior of the bidders. The organization argues that even though employs Wetter once held seniority in Group 14, he relinquished it at the time he assumed the position of Sectiommaa in class (a) of Group 17. Furthermore, the organization submits, contrary to Carrier's contentions, Claimant was a qualified employe in that he possessed the ability and qualifications sufficient to perform the duties of Tack Welder-Arc Weld Process. In support of this latter contention, the Or®sntaation notes the following with regard to Claimant's qualifications:








                    Docket Maaber W-23299


            (3) That from 1972 until he was employed by the Carrier in 1974, he had worked as a welder;


            (4) That although Claimant supposedly failed to pass the first examination on the rules applicable to Track Welders in April, 1978, he did pass such test when reexamined in May of 1978. In any event, the organization specifically notes that with regard to Claimant's supposed failure of the rules test in April., no copy of the original tests have ever been presented;


                        and


            (5) In August of 1978, Claimant successfully completed carrier's course of instruction in Maintenance of clay welding. Tie Organization submits Carrier would not have enrolled Claimant in such a program if it felt that he did not have sufficient ability, qualifications and. capacity for greater responsibility as a welder as contemplated by Rule 19(a) which reads in whole as follows:


              "(a) Promotion shall be based on ability, qualifications, and capacity for greater responsibility end where these require- ments are sur~ricien seniority s all prevail.


The Orgsni.zation refutes Carrier's assertion employs Wetter was "the more qualified bidder to this position", contending the test of relative ability, qualifications, etc*, is an inappropriate standard to be applied under Rule 19(b)· The Organization argues the senior employe need not have ability greater than or equal to the junior employe, asserting his ability need only be sufficient for the purpose.

 Finally, the Organization asserts that even assuming that sufficiency of Claimant's ability was subject to dispute,, he would have been entitled to a qualifying period under Rule 20(h) which reads in whole as follows:
                  Award Number 2321 Page 4

                  Docket Number MW-23299


              "RULE 20. BULLETINM POSITIONS


              (h) An employe assigned to a bulletined position, or who makes a displacement and fails within thirty (30) days to demonstrate his fitness and ability, shall vacate the position on which disqualified, and may displace only the junior regularly assigned employe of the class from which promoted. Employes will be given full cooperation and assistance of department heads and others in their efforts to qualify."


        Carrier argues that as a result of not having received any

bids from employes s previously qualified and assigned as Track Welder in
 either Class (b) or (c) of Group 14, the next alternative, as provided
 for under Rule 19(b), was to attempt to fill the position with a quali
 fied employe from among the other classes in Group 14. Carrier notes
 Claimant was the only employe from among the other classes in Group 14
 to submit a bid and that in its review of Claimant's overall credentials
 it determined that he did not possess the fitness and ability sufficient
 to perform the duties of Track Weldar-Arc Weld Process namely, to operate
 arc welding equipment to repair and build up damaged, battered, chipped
 and worn rails, frogs and switches. Carrier submits that in making the
 determination as to which of the three (3) applicants were qualified for
 the position, it not only weighed their welding skills or lack thereof,
 but also considered their prior work experience which encompassed their
 welding background and knowledge of operating and safety rules. In
 considering these factors with regard to the Claimant, Carrier notes he
 failed to pass the April, 19T8, examination on the rules applicable to
 Track Welders and based on Claimant's work record it was determined he
 lacked the responsibility and safety awareness deemed necessary for the
 position in question, Such lack of responsibility and safety awareness
 is supported. Carrier contends, by Claimant's record which reflects
 that: on numerous occasions he has been observed merely sitting on the
 rail instead of protecting for train movement while the Welder was en
 gaging in welding despite having been previously cautioned; he had been
 cautioned several times for failure to lock Company vehicles when left
 unattended; he had been involved in an accident with a Company vehicle;
 and he was deemed to have been jointly responsible for the loss of a
                  Award Number 23219 Page 5

                  Docket Itumber hb1-23299


grinder imam the rear of a truck which occurred as a result of the machine not having been properly tied down. As to the sufficiency of Claimant's welding skills, it is held by Carrier that he did not possess such skills at the time he bid on the position in question and that it was only subsequent to his bid that he attained the necessary skills upon successfully c instruction as of August 30, 1978.

 Carrier argues that in finding Claimant deficient in the various aforementioned qualification areas, it is well within its contractual grant of authority under Ru7.e 19(b), in fact so specified, to next consider the other t both of whom were from a group in the Track Subdepartment other then Group 14. Of these two (2) applicants, Wetter was found to be the qualified employe for the position.

 As to the Organization's contention Claimant was entitled to a thirty (30) day qualifying period pursuant to Rule 20(h), Carrier takes the two-pronged position that this is new argument and therefore not one to be considered by the Hoard in its deliberations and second that in cry event, such a contractual requirement obtains only after an employe has been assigned to a vacancy and here, the Claimant was not so entitled because he was not awarded the position.

 In sum, Carrier concludes the Organization has not carried its burden of proof by showing Claimant was, in fact, qualified for the position in question at the time its contractual management's rights when it promoted employe Wetter over the Claimant.

 In our review of all the argument and facts of record, we find substantial conflict in the parties respective positions as to whether or not Claimant possessed the necessary and sufficient welding skills to qualify for the position in question, that of Track Welder - Arc Weld Process. We find such conflict to be irreconcilable based on the evidence before us. But even if we were able to resolve these differences in favor of the Claimant, in our judgment, Rule 19(a) still reserves to Carrier the right to consider more than an employe's ability and qualifications; the Rule also calls for consideration of an employe's capacity for greater responsibility when making determinations as to promotions. In the instant case, Carrier argued and the Organization nowhere refuted, that Claimant was deficient in his capacity to assume greater responsibility as so reflected by his past work reco question as to the actual level of sufficiency coupled with a demonstrated deficiency in his capacity to assume greater responsibility, the Hoard is
                  Award Number 23219 Page 6

                  Docket Number Mil-23299


left with no other alternative than to uphold Carrier's original decision to promote the junior employe from outside of Group 14 in the Track Subdepartment for the Class (b) Track Welder position.

        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 Elnployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Eaployes 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 violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:

                &049m-

        Executive Seeratary


Dated at Qfiosgoq Illinois this 16th day of March 1981.