s






(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks, (Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company

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

 1. Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement on August 12, 21, 24, 26, September 4 and November 18, 1981, when it required Chief Interchange Clerk W. Bellinger to suspend the duties of his position to perform outside yard checking - - work not in character with that which he normally performs;

 2. Carrier shall now compensate Mr. Bellinger for eight (8) hours' pay at the pro rata rate of Position GT-58 for each of the above referred to dates."

 OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimant is a Chief Interchange Clerk who normally
 works indoors in an office. On a series of dates in
 August, September and November of 1981 he was called upon to perform outside
 yard checking. This, the Organization claims is a violation of Rule 4 of the
 Safety Rules relating to requirements for proper apparel to be worn performing
 such duties.

 It asserts further that a prior Award, No. 22906, which sustained a claim on the same issue is in the nature of stare decisis.

 It cites "Rule 9. Bulletins" to show that the "title and descrip::),, of position" must show such duties for the Claimant's position if he is to required to perform them.

 Further it refers to a "Note 2" appended to "Rule 45. Absorbing Overtime" which reads:

The Carrier asserts that this case is "resurrecting a claim previously handled", (Award No. 21588) and dismissed in 1977.
                        Docket Number CL-24928


Further the Carrier points out that the disputed assignment resulted from prior abolition of positions "due to declines in Carrier's business throughout the year." As a result of which duties were reassigned and redistributed. This occurred in 1974 and subsequent holders of the Claimant's position performed the disputed duties without complaint. This assertion is unrefuted by the Organization.

 Moreover, the Organization failed to show that these duties were, of their nature, hazardous, demeaning or foreign to the work which the Claimant ordinarily performs. The mere assertion is not proof for which the Organization must bear the burden
Finally the Carrier insists that the Claim is barred by the doctrine of laches. On November 24, 1974 the Carrier issued a letter indicating that, in the future, such duties would be absorbed by all Yard Office Employees and that even such employees as Keypunch Clerks would be required to assist in that work. The first Claim relative to this matter was initiated in 1979. Having "slept on its rights" for five (5) years, the Employes are barred from instituting a challenge to the legitimacy of the assignment.

 The Board is forced to concur with the Carrier's position and without passing on the merits of the Claim finds that it is barred.

        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 claim is barred.


                        A W A R


        Claim dismissed.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


Attest:
      ~~4e i

      Nancy J r - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 14th day of March 1986.