"Claim of the System Committee of the Organization (GL-11034) that:

Case No. 1

1. Carrier violated the effective agreement when it failed to afford Mr.

Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of Operator at East

Cabin, Illinois, on June 30, 1993, in accordance with his status as

senior qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($107.52) for June 30,

1993.

Case No. 2

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at Dubuque, Iowa, on June 1, 2, 3, 4, and

5, 1993, in accordance with his status as senior qualified extra

employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($129.20) for each

date June 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, 1993.

Case No. 3

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Da16m the opportunity to fill the position of Operator at

East Cabin, Illinois, on June 1, 1993, in accordance with his status

as senior qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($107.52) for June 1,

1993.

Case No. 4

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of Operator at

East Cabin, Illinois, on June 1, 1993, in accordance with his status

as senior qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position (107.52) for June 1,

1993.

Case No. 5

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dalmt the opportunity to fill the position of Operator at

East Cabin, Illinois, on June 4, 1993, in accordance with his status

as senior qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($107.52) for June 4,

1993.

Case No. 6

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it fafled to afford Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of Operator at

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahni eight (8) hours' pay at the straight time rate of the above position ($107.52) for June 5, 1993.

Case No. 7

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of Operation at

East Cabin, Illinois, on June 4, 1993, in accordance with his status

as senior qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($107.52) for June 4,

1993.

Case No. 8

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at Dubuque, Iowa, on June 28, 29, and 30,

1993, in accordance with his status as senior qualified extra

employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($129.20) for each

date June 28, 29, and 30, 1993.

Case No. 9

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at FreepoM Illinois, on September 13, 14,

15, 16, 17, and 20, 1993; the position of Yard Clerk at Dubuque,

Iowa, on September 19, 1993; and the position of Yard Clerk,

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above Transportation Assistant

Position ($133.04) for each date September 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and

20, 1993; eight (8) hours' pay at the $13.85 per hour and thirty (30)

minutes overtime at $20.79 per hour of the Yard Clerk Position for

September 19, 1993; and eight (8) hours' pay at the straight time

rate of the above Yard Clerk Position ($110.80) for each date

September 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19, 1993.

Case No. 10

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to RD the position of

Transportation Assistant at Dubuque, Iowa, on September 20, 21,

22, and 23, 1993; and the position of Yard clerk at Dubuque, Iowa,

on September 20, 1993, in accordance with his status as senior

qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above Transportation Assistant

Position ($133.04) for each date September 20, 21, 22. and 23, 1993;

and eight (8) hours and thirty (30) minutes at the time and one-half

rate of $20.78 per hour for the Yard Clerk Position for September

20, 1993.

Case No. I1

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at Freeport, Illinois, on November 24,

1993, in accordance with his status as senior qualified extra

employe;

Case No. 12

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dalhm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at Freeport, Illinois, on December 7, 1993,

in accordance with his status as senior qualified extra employ ;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay

at the straight time rate of the above position ($133.04) for

December 7, 1993.

Case No. 13

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fiV the position of

Transportation Assistant at Freeport. Illinois, on November 29, 30,

December 1, and 2, 1993, in accordance with his status as senior

qualified extra employe;

2. Carrier shall now compensate Claimant Dahm eight (8) hours' pay ,

at the straight time rate of the above position ($133.04) for each

date November 29, 30, December 1, and 2, 1993.

Case No. 14

1. Carrier violated the effective Agreement when it failed to afford

Mr. Kevin Dahm the opportunity to fill the position of

Transportation Assistant at Freeport, Illinois, on December 20, 21,

27, and 28, 1993, in accordance with his status as senior qualified

extra employe;

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 carries 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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.

Reviewed here are 14 separate claims (designated as "Cases") on behalf of the Organization's contention that the Claimant was denied the opportunity to fill a series of short vacancies between June 1 and December 28, 1993. Prior to May 19, 1993, the Claimant was an unassigned employee with headquarters at Freeport, Illinois. By letter dated May 19, 1993, the Claimant was notified as follows:

"Referring to Rule 25 (C) of TCU Agreement, providing for modification of your headquarter point. Effective May 26, 1993 your headquarter point will be Dubuque, Iowa."

Rule 25 (C) reads as follows:

"The company shall designate a headquarters point for each regular position and each regular assigned relief position and for employees not occupying such positions. Seven days' written notice will be given when designations are changed. The company may not modify such headquarters points more than once every 6 months."

No challenge was raised to the Carrier's right to apply this Rule as written, nor that the Claimant was properly notified of the change.

The Claimant at first advised that he would not accept the change of headquarters. The Carrier placed the Claimant in "voluntary status at Freeport", without the right to accept temporary vacancies away from that point. (It should

n the change of headquarters or that he had the right unilaterally to accept the change at some later time.) After proposing some conditions under which he would accept the change, the Claimant eventually indicated his acceptance without conditions by letter on June 29, 1993. The Carrier consulted with an Organization representative and then accepted the Claimant's headquarters change to Dubuque effective July 1, 1993.

The Carrier correctly states that some of the 14 cases were for requested assignments prior to July 1; others were duplicate claims for the identical assignments. Because of the Claimant's delay in accepting the headquarters change, the Board determines that the requests for assignment prior to July 1 have no merit. These are identified as Cases 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8.

Cases 3, 4 and 7 are duplicative of the above instances and thus are dismissed by the Board.

A portion of Case 9 relates to a position of Yard Clerk for September 13 and 1619. The Carrier state September 8. This portion of Case 9 is dismissed.

As to the remainder of the cases, the requests were for assignment to the position of Transportation Assistant at Freeport and, in one instance, at Dubuque.

Rule 16, Promotions, Assignments and Displacements, reads as follows:

"Employees covered by these rules shall be in line for promotion. Promotion, assignments, and displacements (except for promotion or assignment to excepted or management positions) shall be based on management's determination of fitness and ability and seniority; fitness and ability being sufficient, seniority shall prevail."

Rule 20, Short Vacancies, reads in pertinent part as follows:

"(b) Employees shall be selected to fill positions pending assignment by bulletin and all short vacancies in accordance with Rules 16 and 24." (Emphasis added)

The Agreement further provides, however, that the position of Transportation Assistant is one specifically "exempted from [certainj labor agreement provisions", including Rule 16. Thus, the Carrier has firm support for asserting that it may select employees for Transportation Assistant at its discretion. As a result, the Claimant had no contractual right to be selected. While other Rules are cited by the Organization. none overrides the exemption as to Transportation Assistant.

In summary, the Award will deny Cases 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, the latter portion of Case 9, 10. 11, 12, and 14 and will dismiss Cases 3, 4, 7 and the initial portion of Case 9.

AWARD