Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27185
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-26578
 88-3-85-3-320
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Eckehard Muessig 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 Agreement was violated when outside forces were used to cut brush on the Carrier's right-of-way at Camden, New Jersey on January 9, 1984 (System Docket CR-842).

 (2) The Agreement was further violated when the Carrier did not give the General Chairman prior written notification of its plan to assign said work to outside forces.

 (3) Because of the aforesaid violations, furloughed Trackmen W. H. Johnson, D. Wooten, D. Jackson, H. Bowyer and T. L. Hayes shall each be allowed eight (8) hours of pay at their respective straight time rates."

 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 employes 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.

At the outset, the Board observes that certain arguments were made by the Organization in their Submission to the Board which were not raised on the property. Therefore, these may not be considered in our deliberations at this stage of the appellate process.

 The claim as issued was filed by letter dated February 7, 1984. The Organization essentially contends that brush cutting work performed by an outside contractor on January 9, 1984, is contractually reserved to its forces.
 Form 1 Award No. 27185
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-26578
 88-3-85-3-320

 The employees on the property furnished statements asserting they have performed brush cutting. The Carrier countered by labeling such statements as self-serving, ass this work exclusively, but did not furnish any specifics as to when and where others may have performed brush cutting in support of an asserted past practice.

 We do not, however, find it necessary to explore the question of exclusivity as we are herewith concerned with work that could be within the scope and Carrier's uncontested failure to serve notice. (See Third Division Award 24137)

 Under the circumstances, Item 2 of the Statement of Claim is sustained. Item 3 of the Statement furloughed on the claim date. We do not rule on Item 1 of the Statement of Claim.




                          By Order of Third Division


Attest:
        Nancy J. r - Executive Secretary


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