James P. Martin PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of the
 National Railroad Adjustment Board, of my intention to file as ex pane submission on covering an unadjusted dispute between me and the Consolidated Railway Corp., involving the question:

 The strike was used against me as an excuse to dismiss me fry my 912' years of employment. I have been singled out by ConRail without dust cause.

 Fellow workers (approximately 275 other union members), who stood along side of me, due to respect of the strike picket-line on September 28 and 29, 1978 were not all dismisses. Con Rail has discriminated against me as as individual* Also, their complete control and manipulation of the facts, sad the lack of understanding of the facts was happening and possibly why it happened.

 I wish to be restored to service with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and to b e compensated for wage loss sustained in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6-A-1 (d), with benefits restored."

 OPINION OF HOARD: Claimant James P. Martin, a maintenance of way repairmen,
 was charged on October 13s 1978 with:









A trial was held on November 3, 1978 cad Claimant was dismissed on November 22, 1978. Claimant appeared at the National Railroad Adjustment Hosed, Third Division hearing before the R
On August 30, 1979 Public Law Hoard No. 2420, Award No. 2 (Docket No. 7+10), duly constituted by the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes and Consolidated Rail Corporation, heard and determined the very Claim now being brought before this Board se follows:

    "We conclude that Claimant was an unlawful striker and picketer.. in serious violation of his obligations wader the lax and the Agreement of his Organization with Carrier and by his presence and participation with the picketers 'abetted' the others as charged by reinforcement and implementation of such activity.


    Carrier is justified in rejecting Organization's contention that Claimant was not guilty of insubordination because the alder given to him to cease picketing and striking was not a one-to-one order to him only but was addressed to a group of which Claimant was a member. We regard this as having nevertheless been a direct sad unmistakable order from as authoritative source far a valid reason which was disobeyed and supports Carrier's 'insubordination' charge.


    In sum, we find the charges convincingly sustained in such degree and kind as to justify Carrier's imposition of the subject discharge penalty on Claimants"


        The Third Division in Award Number ?2736 stated:


    "In order to prevent chaos and multiplicity of appeals, the instant claim will be dismissed for the reason that the issue involved claim here has been determine 2203, which is a tribunal of coordinate jurisdiction with this Division and whose decisions are, likewise, final and binding wader the Railway labor Act. This claim now being moot is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by this Division.


In keeping with Award No. 22736 this Board lacks jurisdiction to consider this claim and this claim is barred.

 FINDINGS: 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 sad the 1hployes involved is this dispute are respectively Carrier and Fhiployes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
 Award Number 24144
 Docket Number MS-23764

 ,Page 3

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

 That the claim is barred..

 A W A R D
Claim dismissed.

 ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 By Order of Third Division

 Rosemarie Breach - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago., Illinois this 2(th day of January 1983.