Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
This Claim alleges the Carrier violated the Agreement when it refused to pay two Claimants for their time spent taking a typing test and their mileage for travel to the test site.
The instant Claims derive their existence from three previous claims that were withdrawn without prejudice by the organization. The three earlier claims challenged Carrier's refusal to allow three employees, whose incumbent jobs were abolished, to displace into Input/Output Technician (IOT) positions at Gary, Indiana. Carrier's basis for the refusal was lack of qualification.
The IOT positions were implemented by the parties in 1969 pursuant to a negotiated special agreement. The agreement is comprehensive and lengthy. It would serve no purpose to recite it verbatim here. Our review of the agreement reveals that a certain threshold of typing or key entry proficiency was necessary before a candidate would be eligible to be trained for the IOT job. None of the three employees had demonstrated the requisite proficiency or had been previously trained. After the carrier provided the opportunity to take a typing test, the three original claims were withdrawn.
Two of the original claimants took the typing test. The test required them to travel to Joliet, Illinois. When they were not paid for their time or mileage, the two instant Claims were filed.
In claims of this nature, it is well settled that the Organization has the burden of proof to establish the basis for the Claim. On this record, no specific rule or other provision of the Agreement has been successfully cited to support the Claim. Nor has the Organization's evidence established the existence of a past practice of paying for testing time or mileage in similar situations. Under the circumstances, the organization has not met its burden of proof. The Claim, therefore, must be denied.