Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 THIRD DIVISION
 Award No. 31364
 Docket No. MW-31981
 96-3-94-3-339

 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee John C. Fletcher when award was rendered.
PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

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

          1. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier omitted the name of Mr. B. E. Marker from the 1992 BMWE Inter-regional District No. 2 Trackman's Seniority Roster and thereafter failed and refused to correct same (System Docket MW 2945).


          2. As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part (1) above, Claimant B. E. Marker's seniority date of April 12, 1977 shall be restored to its appropriate roster standing on the BMWE Inter-regional District No. 2 Trackman's Seniority Roster."


FINDINGS:

The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:


The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee 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.


Claimant first acquired seniority as a trackman on April 12, 1977. He was furloughed in November 1980. On July 6, 1981, he forfeited all of his inter-regional seniority under the self-executing provisions of Rule 3-D-4, although he retained his local seniority in accordance with the exception provided in Rule

w° w~ co rrronl<ic a.wF,rrnw to ~n
 A.xnmmr- pm0vm i w0
 rt ilo w w O p pw ft rr x rt p O v ~q
 w m m`tm<mo ~°Nrmt`tH-

                  a' w m art Q, rt w : w a Nr

                  w m Km

                  nt" rt to

                            ~ p'0x~r~t~ -Q'rtm


w d'o q. r°tmmr'-H-p 0'"m0
 w ~,~ w~ONm
 ~M 01 rt r-Hhr^ tArwm
 0 p, a a N ~' P. ti pi :r to H
 H N · h O En N
 H H W ti CL £ O C p. m O W f1
 r NM mmh--C1pNI o W
 d rt 0 ct M tr
                  H ONP- (D :r 9 7W ~N- n

O w p,N5wO rt rtr xN
 rt0 0~'tomo N rt
 om mC1Gp,yxm oMMrryw
 N p, ,,~ N m N C M m f.-
 m x pi (i pi (D En P.
 P. 3c ~mh0
 °'rt
 03 ~3 r ft m rtct N o w v V o
 0 2 4 ~ x 0 rt m N rt P~ N C

 w mr n0 titomm0P- fix~x.
 ·e n~ am " 0 (D rt O MONm
 O OH ~,t ortrx·-wow o0rt Nn
 ro rn x ft rm rt rt m ra.V
 M HO 0m Him i.i mN-N-Nr
 my r o 0. x 0 0 m n r o
        w w03

                  ~ m""orto r rtw~w 00

                  w(D :00

                  rot mmxmmm x,°inw' ~'tw

r rN ,.Or ~FH'.-mw~ Fx-mN-rpi nr i1ooC
 a
        til F'- H r" N tfj P) 0 N N rr ~ ft ~, w .

        O m rt O F'- fn "U o o WD 0

                    O hr O W pi OO

                                                          ,p


                                                    0 W O R

          O 0 M Pi O " m m kq b0 pi rt w w w

          f" NAmx<r:3 t tsdfthN-£ wow

          r N rt O N r W " x O W w 0m a%

          m $1 ~t n 0 £ rs K r C1 N d to ~o r a

LABOR MEMBER'S DISSENT

TO

AWARD 31364. DOCKET MW-31981

(Referee Fletcher)


The Majority clearly erred in this award and a reading thereof readily establishes the flawed reasoning. Consequently, a detailed discussion is not necessary here.


However, it is important to point out that the Majority clearly erred when it failed and refused had been furloughed since November of 1980. While it may be hard to believe that an employe would be furloughed for more than twelve (12) years, the fact remains that he was. The record reveals that while he was furloughed, he allegedly forfeited his inter-regional seniority. Once the Claimant was recalled to service on November 1, 1992, he was made aware that his had been revoked in accordance with Rule 3-D-4 of the 1945 Agreement. In accordance with Rule 4, Sec Agreement, the Claimant was entitled to protest the removal of his inter-regional seniority. Rule 4, Section 6(b) reads:


                    "RULE 4 - SENIORITY


      Section 6. Seniority rosters.


                      + + +


    (b) Employees shall have 90 days from the date the roster is posted to file a protest, in writing, with the designated officer of the Company, with copy furnished the General Chairman and local representative. Employees

Labor Member's Dissent
 Award 31364
 Page Two

      "off duty on leave of absence, furlough, sickness, disability, ~urv duty or suspension at the is Dosted, will have not less than 90 days from the date they return to duty to enter protest."


An uncomplicated reading of Rule 4, Section 6(b) reveals that inasmuch as the Claimant had been on furlough, he was entitled to protest the removal of his name from the inter-regional roster within ninety (90) days of his return to service. The record is crystal clear that the claimant's inter-regional seniority had been removed after he was furloughed in November of 1980. In accordance with Rule 4, section 6(b), the Claimant had ninety (90) days from the date he was recalled to protest the removal of his interregional seniority. The Majority's failu ninety (90) days of his return to service is a monumental error and not in accordance with the crystal clear provisions of the Agreement.


      Therefore, I dissent.


                              Respectfully submitted,


                              Roy . Robinson

                              Labo Member