PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
We the undersigned wish to establish seniority in the classification of Inspector.
OPINION OF BOARD: The Petitioners here are Employes of the Carrier's Signal
 Department. They protest the failure to list their names on the Signalman Roster for Seniority District 1 (revised 3/12/82) with seniority in the classification of Inspector. Their protest, it is clear, arises out of the fact another employe's name (D. Noyes) so appears on that roster. Noyes' name appears there as the direct result of an agreement reached between Representatives of the Carrier and the Employes (i.e., Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen). They reached that decision in System Docket 1722 in accordance with the terms of Item 1 of Appendix "R". Their decision was based upon their belief that Noyes had previously held an Inspector position on former B&A territory. Significantly, the contracting parties later revisited the facts in Mr. Noyes' case and decided that he was improperly granted Inspector seniority pursuant to Item 1 of Appendix "R"; therefore, his proper seniority date in the Inspector class was changed from August 30, 1976 to September 7, 1982, pursuant to Rule 3-B-2.
The Agreement of the Parties to place Noyes' name on the disputed seniority roster is a valid one. It simply is not subject to attack here. It is, in our view, final and binding on all concerned.
We note, moreover, that Petitioners' claim does not allege that Noyes' inclusion on the disputed seniority roster violated any specific provision of the Agreement. It does not, in short, center upon the interpretation of the contract between the Parties. Accordingly, it does not constitute a dispute "growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements concerning rates of pay, rules and working conditions. Yet, it must in order for this Board to establish jurisdiction under Section 3, First (i) of the Railway Labor Act.


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 and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;
                    Locket Number MS-25728


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 ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Nancy er - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of July 1985.