(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES 1n DISPUF3:
                (Southern Railway Company


STATE CP CLAli:'Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
                Railroad Signalmen on the Southern Railway Coapsnyy et al:


(a) Ogrrier violated the provisions of Role 37, effective May 1, 197$ revised August 7, 1974, of the Signalmen's Agreement, when they failed or refused to call Signal Maintainer D. A. Green, who was being held for call on December 27 and 28, 1980, to repair a signal failure on Signal. Maintainer D. E. Johnson's territory which joins Signal Maintainer D. A. Green's territory on the south end. Carrier called Signal Maintainer Johnson who was not being held for call. to clear a failure in the signal system at Mile Post 24h.2G.

 (b) Carrier should now be required to compensate Signal Maintainer D. A. Green an amount equal to a winimre call of tyro (2) hours and forty (40) minutes at his overtime rate of pay for this loss of work opportunity and because Rule 37 of the Agreement was violated."

 (General Chairman file: SR-212. Carrier file: SG-491)

 OPINION OF BOARD: The instant case centers on the contention of Claimant,
 Site, Maintainer D. A. Green that Carrier was in contravention of current Agreement Rule 37 w Maintainer D. E. Johnson to repair a signal failure on the week-end of December 27-28, 1980. The instant claim assumes, by reference to Rule 37, that the work occurred in the territory to which the Claimant vas assigned and for which he was held on call on the week-and in question.

 An analysis of the record before the Board does not support such M ai° nor does it warrant conclusion that the Carrier was in violation of Rule 37 (c) or (d), nor other sub-sections when it assigned the work in question to Signal Maintainer Johnson. Since the Claimant had no contractual right to be called to perform the disputed work the claim is herein denied.

 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 sad 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 Jane 21, 1934;
          Award Number 24495 Page 2

                  Docket Nwber SG-24529


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.


                              NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSM.YT BOARD

                              By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
            cy J. Dever

            Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago., Illinois., this 3rd day of August 1983.

 f i

        ~~CEI VEp


          r_o ~C3


      c.


        090 Office _.