NATIOXAL RAILROAD AWUS24ENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION

 James F. Scarce, Referee

 PARTIES '10 DISPUTE:

 (Brotherhood of Railroad Sigoaimea

 (Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

 Award Number 23385
 Docket Number SG-23148

 STAB CF CLAIM: "CSaim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of

On behalf of John 9turdivant far the benefits of Article VIII of the November 16, 1971 Agreement account being required to change his place of residence as a result of Carrier abolishing No. 1273, Walnut Ridge, Arkansas, effective 4:00 p.m. June 30, 1978." (furrier file: K 225-78T)

 OPINION OF HOARD: Claimant herein was a Signalman assigned to Signal Gang 1273
 at Walnut Ridge, Arlosasas. Effective Jung 30,, 1978, the
 Carrier abolished one of the two Signalman positions on Gang 1273, a position
 occupied by the Claimant who exercised his seniority against a junior employs
 in the Signal Maintenance classification at Ozark,, Arkansas. The change was
 more than 30 miles distant from walnut Ridge sad eventually necessitated the
 Claimant's sale of his hams sad relocation of his family. A claim was made
 under Article VIII of the November 16, 1971 Agreement for benefits under
 Sections 10 sad 3.1 of the Washington Job Protection Agreement, the Orm!Lni
 zation coutendiag the events in this case met the criteria set out in Article
 VIII far such benefits, i.e. the Carrier had made a technological, operational
 or or®eai.zatioml change in its business. Essentially., the organization asserts
 the work remained after the Claimant's departure and thus as operational or
 organizational change took place; the Carrier asserts the extent of work on
 Gang 1273 had dimiatehed to the point that it no longer needed a second sigml
 man. The burden here is on the Organization to show proof of an organizational
 as operational change in its method of doing business as it relates to the Claim
 ant. None has been demonstrated on the record; therefore, its claim foe benefits
 is without merit.

That the parties waived oral hearing;

 That the Carrier and the Employes involved is this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the messing 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 ADJUgUGNT HOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago,, Illinois this 15th day of September 1981.
    i~,~EC: I L%= J

    i4P

          ~~ m~I i

    ~~', C

    i o9o C'~ C2 -


                    9

r i