Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29433
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-29773
 92-3-91-3-138
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Hugh G. Duffy when award was rendered.
 (Transportation Communications International Union
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (CSX rrsnsportation, Inc. (formerly The Seaboard Coastline
 Railroad Company)

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

1. Carrier violated the Agreement on November 17, 1987, when it removed work from _:e trait --overed under the current working Agreement and assigned said duties to an outside party.

 2. Because of the above violation, Carrier shall now compensate the Senior Available --rew Dispatcher at Florence, South Carolina one (1) day's pay at the applicable rate, seven (7) days a week, three (3) shifts a day, to begin sixty (60) days prior to date claim is filed, and shall be on a continuous basis until claim 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.

This is a Scope Rule claim in which the relevant facts are not in dispute. Prior to November 17, 1987, Crew Dispatchers at Florence, South Carolina, called crews staying at the Red Carpet Inn in Columbia, South Carolina, by going through the Hotel Operator and talking to them in their individual rooms wnile the Operator stayed on the line. On that date, when the Motel made operational changes which prevented the Operator from staying on the line after the Crew Dispatcher was connected with an individual employee, the Carrier issued a bulletin requiring Crew Dispatchers to give the calling information to the Motel Clerk, who would then relay the information to the individual :rew members.
 Form 1 Award No. 29433
 Page 2 Docket No. CL-29773
 92-3-91-3-138

 'he Carrier states that this was done in order to avoid making a separate long distance telephone call to the motel for each crew member, and cited numerous other locations where Crew Dispatchers give calls to motel operators for relaying to crew members.

 The Organization filed a claim alleging that this action constituted a removal of work previously 7erformed by clerical employees and assignment of the work to an outside party, thus violating Rule 1 of the Agreement, which is a "work and position" Scope Rule in effect since May 7, 1981.

 The Board has carefully reviewed the evidence and has considered the arguments presents] by the ':ranization. After these deliberations, we conclude that the claim must Carrier were not refuted dur:-.~ the handling of the claim on the property.



This position was repeated bj the Director of Labor Relations in his letter dated August 6, _?90. The 'rzanization, on the property, did not refute the Carrier on this'~oint.

 We thus =)11ow well-established precedent that when material statements are made by ire party :nd no the contentions standing as :nrebutted, the material statements are accepted as fact, particularly when -.-ere is both the opportunity and the time to rebut the contention.






Attest:
        .ancy J. D -Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of October 1992.