(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Ioployes
 PARTIES 2n DISPUTE:
 (Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company

 STATE CP CLAD(: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned or otherwise permitted employes of the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company to remove snow from switches at Austin, Minnesota on February 23, 1978 (System File c#43/D-2169).

 (2) Furloughed employes P. R. Nsrby and S. D. Hulot each be allowed four (4) hours of pay at their respective straight-tine rates because of the violation referred to in Part (1) hereof."

 OPINION C F BOARD: According to the Organisation, on February 23, 1978
 the Carrier "...assigned or otherwise permitted" a
 Foreman and a Laborer of the C&M Transportation Company to remove snow
 from switches. The Raployea assert that such removal has been customarily,
 traditionally and historically assigned to and performed by Carrier's Track
 Subdepartmuat forces. Further, it is asserted that the Claimants, who
 were on furlough, were available and fully qualified to perform all of the
 work in question.

 Although, on the property, certain defenses were raised such as an allegation that the Employes who performed the work were "trespassers" and that certain time limits were ignored, the case, as presented here, is restricted to a consideration of more clearly defined merits of dispute.

 The Carrier asserts that the work in question "...was performed on trackage that is jointly owned by the Milwaukee and the CLNW Railroads. The fployes of the C&M Railroad were merely cleaning switches for movement of their own train on Milwaukee Road." Further, the Carrier asserts that the work performed was done without its knowledge at the time.

 Although, in Its Submission, the Employes have made certain cod.. meats concerning the factual assertion referred to above, we do not find any evidence that the Employes disputed the contentions while the matter was under review on the property, even though there was ample opportunity to do so.
                  Dooket Humber MW-23726


The Carrier has cited a nmmber of Awards which (it asserts) substantiates its position, such as Third Division Award 13581, among others. Our attention has also been invited to Award 22942 which seems to be pertinent to the unrebutted factual assertions of record.

        FIImIIVGS: 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 not violated.


                    A G A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD AnM7KENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: eau ive secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of March 1981.