.i:v2r': .. =b°r 23854


                        ,:L',~ D^ ,rTS_. ~·~ nr ~! _'71'~?1

                        ='r_ _, D'o,.,,, _ _ -b_ _. _


                    Martin F. Scheiwnaa, Referee


              (Prot~:erhood of Railway, Airline and d -~,--_aship Clerta,

              ( :reight Handlers, Txpress and Station Employes

PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
              (Southern Pacific Transportation Compaq (Pacific Lines)


                STAMiEN7 OF a.ABS: Claim of the System Co=it tee of the Brotherhood (GL-9292) that:


        (a) The Southern Pacific Transportation Company violated its Agree-

ments with this Organization when it refused and/or failed to rants i-: the proper number of Guaranteed Extra Board positions required by said agreements at L;zeae, Oregon, on and subsequent to November 15, 177,·· and

 (b) The Southern Pacific Transportation Coapaa·r shah now be required to establish and maintain the number of positions on the Guaranteed 3%tra Eoard at Eug-aae specified in Article VII, Agreement of September 15, 1971.

 OPINION OF BOA.9D: The Organization contends that Carrier violated the Agree
 ment when it failed to maintain the proper number of
 Guaranteed Extra Board positions at Eugene, Oregon on and subsequent to
 November 15, 1977. Specifically, the Employe claims that Carrier violated
 Article VII, Section 1(b )1. It states:
        "1. The number of extra board positions at each of the locations set forth in (a) of this section shall be not less than fifteen percent (150) of the r-lumber of permanent positions including permanent assigned relief positions to be served from such locations; if the number of positions on Guaranteed Extra Boards at any location drops below fifteen percent (15p) and there is insufficie the extra boards as provided herein, carrier will arrange to hire an appropriate number of additional employes."


At the time that this dispute arose, there were one hundred sixty-three (163) positions that were relieved by the extra board. Using the formula in the Agreement there should have been twenty-four (24) men on the extra board. Instead, there were eighteen (18) positions on the board when this elain was instituted.

 Gamier does not dispute that the cumber of employes on the board was insufficient. However, it argues that an attempt was being mad°_ to hire new employes. Carrier also contends that the claim is hoot because subsequent to the claims, in February 1978, the extra board had twenty-eight (2°) employes. Since this is in excess of the required number, Carrier asserts that the claim was mooted.
                        Award _;=-ber 23854 Fay= 2

                        Socket :lumber L-237'x-


:ae are of the view that the claim is not moot. While it a true that the circumstances complained of were ameliorated subsequently, the fact re:.sias that the claim, as presented, is not ?:oot simply because com_r,Laace :;lth the Agreement took place alter Uhe grievance was filed.

 The evidence is absolutely clear that Carrier violated the Agreement when it had less than 15;"0 of the employes to be covered on the board. While we are mindful that Carrier attempted to comply with the Agreement, the fact of the mat finding impossibility of performance. As such, the claim must be sustained.

        FI;;D:.::GS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whoia record and all the -evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the uaployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier sad 3nployss within the meaning of the °ailaay Labor Acts as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was violated.


                          A W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADjUS1'Z=1 BCAt~'D

                              By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By ~u
 marie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois this 28th day of April 1982· ~ / ~'-~ ~ f v~

                                                    J~I .,_.i


                                            r`

                                            `hc