Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29130
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MS-28672
 92-3-89-3-24
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Peter R. Meyers when award was rendered.

 (J. E. Dame PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 "This letter is protesting the combined Roster of Train Dispatchers in the Jacksonville, FL offi Foshee is August 14, 1981. Mr. Foshee forfeited his seniority as the attached letters indicate on July 17, 1985 and established his new seniority date on July 21, 1985.

 With this :orfeiture of J. A. Foshee seniority. I am also protesting the Birmingham Train Dispat Foshee seniority age as August 14, 1981 not July 21, 1985."

 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 American Train Dispatchers Association was advised of the penden Submission with the Division.

 The issue in this case concerns the proper posting of Train Dispatcher J. A. Foshee's seniority Jacksonville, Florida, =rain dispatching office when it consolidated several of its train dispatching offices into the Florida office, which included the Evansville, Indiana, office where Foshee had most recently worked. The Claimant contends that senior date he transferred to the Evansville, Indiana, office from the Birmingham, Alabama office, and not the seniority date he established in Birmingham.
 Form 1 Award No. 29130
 Page 2 Docket No. MS-28672
 92-3-89-3-24
 The Claimant filed his protest on February 10, 1988. The alleged
 wrongdoing took place in January 1986, and January 1987.

 Under the Rules, seniority rosters are open to protest for only a sixty-day period following the date of issuance. Therefore, the claim was not filed in a timely fashion.

 Numerous Awards have held that claims regarding seniority rosters must be timely filed in accordance with the Rules. See Second Division Awards 11104 and 11171. It is not a continuing violation. See Second Division Award 10667. Hence, this claim was invalid from the time of its inception. Therefore, the claim must be de





                          By Order of Third Division


Attest:
          y J.~ v -Executive Secretary


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