PARTIES 2b DISPUTE:



(a) That the Carrier violated and. continues to violate the General Agreement when beginning on or about August 30, 1978, it did without notice, conference, or agreement, arbitrarily and unilaterally removed work from the C&0 Pittsburgh District, Telephone Switchboard Operator Roster at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and transferred such work to the C&0 Baltimore District Switchboard Operator Roster at Baltimore, Maryland sad to certain H&0 positions (contract and non-contract) at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, sad

 (b) That each sad every employs whose position was abolished or who was affected, as s result of these abolishments and who suffered loss as a result of this arbitrary action of the Carrier shall be compensated for any and all loss or adverse effect retroactive to the date on which the violation occurred. Claim to continue until correction is made.

 OPINION OF HOARD: The claim asserts a violation of the consolidation and
 reorganization rule of the Agreement by resaon.of as alleged unilateral transfer of work from th Switchboard Operator Boater.
The Carrier denies the allegations. It replies that it did abolish the Pittsburgh switchboard positions nod did change work shifts, but dad not transfer any part of the work of the abolished positions. It took that action for reasons of economy,, it says, and not pursuant to any consolidation or reorganizations and it ev by its action.

 From our review of the record and after considering the arguments made on the property and before this Board, we are unable to conclude that there was in fact a transfer of work* Thus, we cannot find in this record the proof necessary to support the factual allegation on which the claim is based. In our view., the Organization's factual case has been built on no more than unfounded assumption and surmise. The burden of substantiating the allegations of the claim rests with the petitioner. Accordingly we must deter the claim.
                    Docket Number CL-24249


        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record sad all the evidence, finds sad holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively (terrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Iabcr 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.


                        RATIONAL RAILROAD AWTJS24ENT BOARD

                        By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Acting Executive Secret&ry National Railroad Adjustment Board


        By

.i Rosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

        Dated at Chicago Illinois this 28th day of February 1983.


                                  REeEII,-FD


                                        ,,.


                                Ch/c°9o office -g~

                                          r~