(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, ( Freight Handlers, E:prees and Station Employes PARTIES 2b DISPUTE:



1. Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement when it failed to assign Job No. 151 to Mr. James Brightbill, effective July 14, 1978.

 2. Carrier shall now compensate Mr. Brightbill for eight (8) hours' pay at the pro rata rate of Job No. 151, which is in addition to any other earnings, commencing on July 14, 1978 and continuing for each and everyday thereafter that he is denied this position.

 OPINION OF HOARD: In our review of this case, the pivotal question before
 this Hoard is whether or not Claimant was qualified to
 perform the duties of Job Bo. 151, Telephone Operator, Steno-Clerk, when
 he applied for this position on July 13, 1978 or reasonably could have
 qualified for this position consistent with the requirements of Agreement
 Rule 29 (Failure to qualifyj. An ancillary question is whether Carrier
 modified its selection standards, when it did not maintain the position
 as a non-stenographic Job and instead awarded the position to a new employe,
 who admittedly was proficient in stenography.

 The record shows that Claimant was not skilled in stenography at the time he applied for this position and subsequently performed poorly when he took the stenographic phase of the three (3) part typing test on May 7, 1979. Re required approximately two and one-half (2j) hours to transcribe and type ten (10) minutes of dictation. When he was offered another opportunity to take the stenographic test on May 9, 1979, he refused to be tested because he concluded that he was unqualified in this discipline. On this day as a matter of record, he exercised his seniority to Job No. 280. Recognising his skill deficiency, we do not believe that he could realistically qualify for this position within the time pereseters of Rule 29. It would require more time than is allowed by this provision to develop the acceptable competency level standards. This does not mean that Claimant could not eventually qualify for this position, but only that a longer period of preparation is required. A mi this position on a trial basis.
      __ Award Number 23276 Page 2

      Docket Number CL-23231


On the other hand, we cannot conclude that Carrier violated the Agreement when it changed its selection criteria and manifestly required applicants to possess stenographic skills. It had the right to insist that the incumbent of the position be able to fulfill all of the duty of the job, i=espeatire of past hiring observances and vas not enjoined to design the position to fit the incumbent's qualifications. In Third Division Award 12419 which conceptually parallels this case, we held in pertinent part that:

        may have waived the stenographic requirements of the position from time to time but this, in and of itself, was no waiver of its right to demand of anyone seeking, or indeed, occupying the sob, that he possess all the required qualifications. This is not determination; it is a privileged exercise of managerial discretion."


This holing is foursquare on point with the facts herein. Carrier vas within its right when it required the incumbent of Job No. 151 to be proficient in stenographic skills. We Vill deny the claim.

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and aZl 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 W A R D


                      Claim denied.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMMT BOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


ATTFST:~
        ecu ve .~ecreDated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of April 1981.