Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 28199
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-28261
 89-3-88-3-33
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Robert W. McAllister when award was rendered.
 (Transportation Communications International Union
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

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

1. Carrier violated the agreement between the parties in particular Rule 7 as amended, effective September 7, 1982 when it required Clerk L. F. Hall to train on Position No. 117 and failed and refused to compensate her accordingly (Carrier's File No. 87038).

 2. Carrier shall now be required to compensate Clerk L. F. Hall for thirteen (13) days' pay at one half the rate of Position No. 117 or her protected rate, which ever i
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.

On September 24, 1986, by Bulletin No. 7, the Carrier abolished the Claimant's position effective September 29, 1986. By letter of October 1, 1986, the Claimant requested permission to displace a junior clerk pending qualification of Job No. 117. The Carrier granted this request. The Organization asserts the Carrier fact the training period took eighteen (18) days.
 Form 1 Award No ..28199
 Page 2 Docket No. CL-28261
 89-3-88-3-33

 The Carrier denies any Agreement violation. The Carrier argues the Claimant was qualified on seven other positions carrying equal or higher pay. Rather than bid on these positions, the Carrier contends the Claimant chose to displace onto Job No. 117, for which she was not qualified. Accordingly, the Carrier charges her voluntary election cannot be considered to be the direct result of the Carrier's abolishment of her former position. Since it permitted the Claimant to train compensated the Claimant as specified under Section (7) of the Training Agreement dated August 19, 1 earnings is purportedly "time lost voluntarily."

 The August 19, 1982, Training Agreement clearly does not apply to the voluntary exercise of seniority. This Board, however, finds little merit in the Carrier's complaint that this Claimant chose to exercise her seniority on a position for which she was not qualified, thereby nullifying the contested provision of the 1982 Training Agreement. The record establishes the Carrier abolished the Claimant's position effective September 29, 1986. Thus, her displacement is a result of the abolishment of her job. This action does not fall within any exceptions set forth in the 1982 Training Agreement. The Claimant did not voluntarily leave her position because of a change in assigned hours nor did she vo further supported by the Board's reasoning set forth in Third Division Award 26126.




                          By Order of Third Division


Attes
        Nancy J r - Executive Secretary

              Yff


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 20th day of November 1989.