,yt NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 Award Number 25900
 THIRD DIVISION Docket Number MW-24812
 George V. Boyle, Referee

PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 1. The Carrier violated the Agreement when it laid off Trackman C. W. Breedlove on May 4, 1981 without benefit of five (5) days' advance notice (System File C-13-81/MW-442).

 2. The claimant shall be allowed forty (40) hours of pay at his straight-time rate because of the violation referred to in Part (1) hereof."

 OPINION OF BOARD: C. W. Breedlove, a Trackman at Walzenburg, Colorado, was
 assigned to duties on a Tie Gang. He alleges that his
 Foreman called him at 9:30 P.M. on May 3, 1981 to advise him that he need not
 report for work at 6:00 A.M. on May 4, since his position had been abolished.
 This, the Employes contend, was a violation of the Agreement, specifically,
 "Rule 13 - Force Reduction" which reads:

Accordingly they filed the above Claim on June 9, 1981.

 The Carrier reply declined the Claim stating, "No job was terminated or abolished on the Tie Gang. What actually happened was that a senior employee who was displaced from another Gang, bumped the -junior man on the Tie Gang (Clyde Breedlove) and the Extra Gang Foreman, H. W. Conzales, allowed `Lr. Breedlove to work two days after his displacement due to being short of men."

 The Employees dispute this contention arguing that they are unable t3 find specific information in the Carrier's records to support the Carrier's position. Further they offer a letter dated "Jan. 19, 1981" (sic) from Michael A. Virgil, another individual who alleges that no such Senior Trackman had bumped since he "would have known who 'bumped' me."

 The Carrier responds that the Claimant was not notified that his job had been abolished since that, in fact, had not occurred and that by letter of November 27, 1981, in response to the Employee's letter of October 26, 1981, the Carrier identified the senior man, Mr. Santistevan.

 Without further exposition, the Board is forced to conclude the Organization has not sustained the burden of proof, which is required in such circumstances and must therefore deny the Claim.


        FINDINGS: 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 Employes 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.


        A W A R D

        Claim denied.

        NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

        _a By Order of Third Division


Attest:r~Yt~
            ~~Ju


              Nancy J. Ovte er - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 26th day of February 1986.

 ~jVED '~

            I


    C1--~1. "

c·sL