PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Southern Pacifi9 Transportation Company (Pacific Lines)











(e) Mr. J.W. Sutherland be compensated for work performed on Position No. C-4, Calculator Machine Operator, and all subsequent assignments, to positions of Calcu for April 2, 1979, and for each date thereafter to which he is entitled to receive compensation, at the established daily rate of his position(s), in lieu of compensation allowed.

 (f) Senior Division Clerk N. Ogao, Position D-91; Senior Rate and Division Clerk D. Collins, position D-80; Rate and Division Cleric J.D. Krupnick, Position D-49; Clerk N.F. Capule, Position D-59, and Calculator Machine Operator T.L. Rodriguez, Position C-6, be compensated for work performed on position indicated herein and, in the case of employe T.L. Rodriguez. all subsequent assignments to Calculator Machine Operator positions and, in named employe, all subsequent assignments to "Rate Clerk positions" including positions of Rate Clerk, Senior Rate Clerk, Senior Division Clerk, Rate and Division Clerk. Senior Rate and Division Clerk, for February 14, 1979, and for each date thereafter to which they are entitled to receive compensation, at the established daily rate of position(s), in lieu of compensation allowed.

 (g) Key Punch Operators C.M. Williams, Position ZA-185; J.D. Pinkney, Position ZA-314; E. Ferguson, Position ZA-189; Ids James, Position ZA-324; C.T. Younger, Position ZA-309; E.A. Almarinez, Position ZA-311; and A.F. Sorber, Position ZA-3120 be compensated for work performed on position indicated herein and all subsequent assignment positions, for February 14, 1979, and for each date thereafter to which they are entitled to receive compensation, at the established daily rate of their respective position(s) in lieu of compensation allowed.

 (h) Rate and Division Clerks R.H. Coxon, Position R-36; L.K. Pattison. Position R-56; N.V. Prince, Position R-74; S.G. Athey. Position E-75; and G.O. Manzano, Position R-41, be compensated for work performed on position indicated herein and all subsequent assignments to Rate Clerk positions

 including positions of Rate Clerk, Senior hate Clerk, Senior Division Clerk, Rate and Division Clerk. Senior Rate and Division Clerk, for February 14, 1979, and for each date thereafter to which they are entitled to receive compensation allowed.

 (i)' Mrs. S.S. Leam be compensated for work performed on Position ZA-179, Key Punch Operator, and all subsequent assignments to positions of Key Punch Operator in the department of Central Collections, for Septemb and for each date thereafter to which she is entitled to receive compensation at the established daily rate of her position(s), in lieu of compensation allowed.


OPINION OF HOARD: This dispute deals with the Agreement dated January 13j.
 1979., and particularly Article VIII. That Rule provides as follows:





















                Docket Humber CL-24090


The Organization's basic position is that Carrier, having failed to give the appropriate notice provided in Section 3 of Article VIII, has forfeited the right to preserve the step-rate agreements which had been in effect since 1931. Thus, the Organization argues that the various Claimants are entitled to the full rate of their positions in accordance with Article VIII.

 (errier, in addition to challenging the lack of specificity in the Claims, asserts that Petitioner has totally misinterpreted the significance of Article VIII in t certain positions and the new rule is applicable only to newly hired employee following the effective date of the Agreement, February 14, 1979· Thus, according to Carrier, Article VIII and the step-rate agreements are wholly compatible and not mutually exclusive.

 The Board has examined the language of Article VIII with care and has concluded that Petitioner has erred in its understanding of that provision. It is apparent, from the very first sentence of Section 1 of the Article, that the entire Article, dealing solely with entry rates, is applicable only to employes entering service on and after the effective date of the Agreement, which in this instance was February 14, 1979. There is no indication in the handling of this dispute that any of the Claimants were hired on or after February 14, 1979. Further there does not, on a prima facie basis, appear to be any incompatibility between the provisions of the step-rate agreements and the entry level rate provided for in Article VIII.
        FIMIHC,S: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral. hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employee 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. ,~ C·~ ~~`

        A W A R D '

        ' ·


                                    i,,

                                    -)

        Claim denied. it

                          v . C,; _ .

                          NATIONAL RAnROAD~AVUSWNT BOA~C, %

                          By Order of Third'DAfoue -'~M`,


ATTEST: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By / vLc.a
 Rosemarie Breach - atra ve ~Assistant

 Thted at fhicaao. Illinois. this 14th day ef march loAv_