(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks,

( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes PARTIES 'In DISPUTE:
              (The Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad Company


                STATdT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood (GL-9314) that:


(a) Carrier violated the Rules Agreement effective September 1, 1946, as amended.

 (b) Claimant was available but was not called for to work as a stenographer on Jane 28, 29, 30, 1978 and Carrier assigned a ,junior employe to said position.

 (c) Claimant had previously worked on a stenographer position prior to these dates.

 (d) That claimant, Ms. Y. P. Burgess, be compensated for one (1) days pay for June 28, 29, 30, 1978.

 OPINIOPt OF BOARD: Claimant, an Extra Clerk, seeks three days of pay for

 June 28, 29 and 30, 1978 for as alleged violation of Rule 28(b) of the applicable agreement. On the dates in controversy, the Carrier called and used a ,junior employe to fill an extra stenographer position. Claimant asserts she should have worked as a stenographer since she had more seniority as well as the requisite ability and skill.

 The Organization argues that Claimant had previously demonstrated her stenographic skills when she filled an extra stenographer position on July 14, 1977. The Carrier acknowledges that Claimant was called to fill an extra stenographer position on July 14, 1977 (due to the absence of other extra clerks with stenographic skills) but based on her unsatisfactory performance, the Carrier dete perform stenographic work. The Carrier asserted that Claimant had to write out, in long hand, her shorthand notes before she typed the dictation.

        As we stated .in Third Division Award No. 23243_(Liebervan), the_ ...

Claimant must come forward with probative evidence rebutting the Carrier's
 reasonable determination that she was unqualified for the position. In
 that award, we said:

        "...Claimant has the burden of establishing that she has the required ability to perform in the position is face of Carrier's assertions and evidence to the contrary."

Award Number 23849

Docket Number CL-23821


is this case, based on Claimant's performance on July 14, 1977, the Carrier reasonably concluded that Claimant's inability to type directly from her shorthand notations showed she lacked basic stenographic skills. The Claimant has failed to offer an On the contrary, Claimant concedes that she must always transform her shorthand notes to written for transcription procedure makes it easier for her to type a correct rendition of the dictated material but this merely reinforces the Carrier's determination that she was unquali demonstrate she can perform the 'work, not in the fashion that is easiest for her, but by the method and with the skills used by the Carrier's regular stenographers. Thus, we must deny the claim.

 FItaINCS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
 parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and
 upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 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.
Claim denied.

 ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
        National Railroad Adjustment Board


NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJ'JS31ENT BOARD
 By Order of Third Division

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of April 1982·