Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27732
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-27052
 89-3-86-3-96
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Rodney E. Dennis when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

(National Railroad Passenger Corporation

(Amtrak) - Northeast Corridor


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

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned C&S Department forces instead of Bri caution stripes on 32nd Street platform area on August 16, 1984 (System File NEC-BMWE-SD-1120).

 (2) As a consequence of the aforesaid violation, Assistant B&B Painter Foreman G. Smith and B&B Painter A. DiCarne shall each be allowed an additional seven (7) 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.

As Third Party in Interest, the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the Joint Council of Carmen were advised of the pendency of this dispute. The Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers filed Submissions with the Division. The Joint Council of Carmen did not file a Submission.

 On August 16, 1984, Carrier assigned communication and signal personnel to paint yellow caution lines on the 32nd Street platform. B&B Paint Department employes observed the C&S people painting and filed a claim requesting eight straight-time hours for each of two Claimants.

 A first level supervisor authorized one hours' pay in an effort to compromise the claim, because the C&S Foreman who assigned the work furnished a statement indicating the disputed work was performed in one hour.
 Form I Award No. 27732
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-27052
 89-3-86-3-96

 Initially, we refuse to consider the first level supervisor's payment authorization as an indication of the Carrier's admission of guilt in this matter as the Organizatio to consider settlement offers as admissions of guilt in such cases, no responsible Carrier official this Board. For this reason, this Organization argument must be rejected. (Second Division Award 11101)

 Our review of the record as developed on the property reveals irreconcilable facts leaving this decide the Claim.




                          By Order of Third Division


Attest:
      'Nancy J. evK- Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 2nd day of March 1989.