Form L NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29355
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-28762
 92-3-89-3-254
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Peter R. Meyers when award was rendered.
 (Transportation Communications International Union
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (The Belt Railway Company of Chicago

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

L. Carrier violated the effective agreement when, effective April 5, 1988, it abolished ail positions on the guaranteed extra board and then continued to fill these posi
2. Carrier shall now compensate the five (5) senior furloughed employes eight (8) '.ours' pay at the straight time rate of the position they would have worked, or the extra board guarantee rate, for April 5, 1988, and for each and every day thereafter that a like violation exists."

 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.

 Effective `larch 28, 1988, the Carrier abolished nine regular Extra Board positions. The Organization thereafter filed a Claim challenging the Carrier's use of the five senior furloughed employees to fill temporary vacancies and perform extra work. The Carrier denied the Claim on grounds that the Agreement permits the Carrier to use furloughed employees to fill temporary vacancies, and that the employees affected when the Extra Board positions were abolished had since been working 40-hour weeks and had suffered no losses. The Carrier also contends that the Board does not have jurisdiction over this matter, and Form 1 Award No. 29355
 Page 2 Docket No. CL-28762
 92-3-89-3-254

 The Board ::as reviewed the record in this case, and we find that the Organization has not met its burden of proof that a violation of the Agreement has occurred. Therefore, the Claim must be denied.

 The record reveals that the Carrier has established that it suffered a severe decline in ousiness in late 1987. As a result, it was required to make force reductions in all departments of the Carrier which affected a number of clerical tositions. in March 1988, it abolished nine Extra Board assignments, of whic:n only five were filled at that time. The Organization admits that there was a general reduction in force at that time and does not deny the existence ~: the downturn in business.

 The Carrier has established that it has a right to reduce its forces when there is an established loss of business. Article I, Section 2, states in part:

The Organization relies in large part on Third Division Award 26557, issued in 1987, in another case between these two same parties. That case involved the Carrier's failure to establish a permanent Switching Information Clerk position despite the fact that Extra Board employees were regularly filling that position. This Board sustained the Claim in that case. However, we must note that the first sentence in that Award was:

As stated above, the case at hand involves a severe downturn in business. We recognize that f work, but that fact alone does not establish a violation of the Agreement. Moreover, we should note that there was no loss in pay involved here.
 Form 1 Award No. 29355
 Page 3 Docket No. CL-28762
 92-3-89-3-254
 For all of the above reasons, the Claim must be denied.
 A W A R D




Attest:
      Nancy J. -'Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, ::linois, tnis 25th day of August 1992.