Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27171
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-26524
 88-3-85-3-261
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Robert W. McAllister when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

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

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it refused to permit Trackman K. F. Adams to displace a junior trackman on December 19 and 20, 1983 (System Docket CR-713).

 (2) Because of the aforesaid violation, Trackman K. F. Adams shall be allowed sixteen (16) hours of pay at his straight time rate."

 FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

On December 19, 1983, Claimant was displaced by a senior employee. The Organization contends the Claimant went to the Division Office and attempted to determine if junior employee E. Troy was still working. According to the Organiz not furloughed and worked through December 20, 1983.

 Carrier's Philadelphia Division Engineer answered the time claim by letter of February 9, 1984, and stated in pertinent part:
Form 1 Award No. 27171
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-26524
 88-3-85-3-261

 The Organization argues that Rule 4, Section 2 states that an employee may exercise seniority to a position for which he is qualified when displaced by a senior employee. The Organization insists the Carrier failed to provide the Claimant with accurate information concerning the position occupied by junior employee Troy. The Organization claims this failure constitutes a violation of the Agreement. The Carrier advances the proposition that the Claimant was employee Troy because the Claimant was not qualified as a Trackman/casual driver. The Carrier cites Rule 4 - Seniority - Section 2(a)2 and asserts it provides that an employee may exercise seniority to a position for which he is qualified when physically displaced by a senior employee. (Emphasis added)

 The Organization is accurate in its representation that the Claimant was not initially told he was not qualified. Notwithstanding, when, on February 9, 1984, the Division Engineer initially denied this claim, he clearly set forth his positi the Claimant did not possess a M.W. 200 card and, accordingly, was not qualified as a casual driver, Organization did not rebut this position.




                          By Order of Third Division


Attest:
        Nancy J. -Executive Sec etary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 23rd day of June 1988.