Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29115
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-29167
 92-3-90-3-20
 The Third consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee John C. Fletcher when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Union Pacific Railroad Company (former Missouri ( Pacific Railroad Company)

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

 (1) The Agreement was violated when, effective January 15, 1988, the Carrier abolished the positions of Machine Operators F. W. Moody, R. A. Isgrig and R. D. Collins without five (5) working days' advance notice and subsequently assigned junior emp Panel Plant in North Little Rock, Arkansas effective January 16, 1988 (System Files 880195 and 880194 MPR).

 (2) As a consequence of the aforesaid violations, Claimants F. W. Moody, R. A. Isgrig and R. D. Collins shall each be allowed ninety-six (96) hours of straight time pay and eight (8) hours of time and one-half pay at the machine operator's 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 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.

 Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.

 The three Claimants named in this dispute had been working as Roadway Machine Operators until their jobs were abolished in December 1987. Each was allowed to displace a junior employee working as a Machine Operator on Gang 9415 in the Panel Plant, North Little Rock, Arkansas. On January 15, 1988 (according to Carrier's version of the incident) the Plant Supervisor, upon his return from vacation, determined that Claimants' had been allowed to displace illegally ( jobs were rebulletined.
 Form 1 Award No. 29115
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-29167
 92-3-90-3-20

 The Organization filed two separate Claims contending that Carrier improperly abolished the positions without giving Claimant's the required five days notice. Also, Carrier assigned junior employees to perform the duties of Claimants' positions instead of allowing the Claimants to work in accordance with their seniority. The Organization also argues that Claimants' were fully qualified to work the jobs in the Panel Plant.

 Carrier contends that Claimants did not possess qualifications to operate the equipment in the Panel Plant. Thus their displacements were illegal and to correct the problem their jobs were abolished and rebulletined. Carrier states, in support of the procedure followed to get Claimants off the jobs in the Panel Plant, that it felt:

Notwithstanding Carrier's expression of noble motive to avoid disqualification of three machine their qualifications as machine operators questioned) we are unable, from a fair reading of the Agreement, to conclude that Claimants jobs were properly abolished. Moreover, without a clear showing that Claimants were not qualified it was improper to wo day after the abolishments occurred. It is apparent that at least someone in management considered Claimants qualified to work the jobs or else they would not have been allowed to displace originally. Moreover, there is nothing substantive in this record
If it is correct that the three Machine Operators were not qualified (as Carrier suggests but is disputed by the Organization) the way to remedy the situation was through a determination of qualifications (where the issue could be addressed by examination of evidence on both qualifications and ability of the individuals as well as the duties and requirements of the positions), not an illegal that the three incumbents had secured the jobs through illegal displacements.






                            By Order of Third Division


Attest:
      Nancy J. "Op'- Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of February 1992.