Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 32412
Docket No. CL-32124
98-3-94-3-528

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Edwin H. Benn when award was rendered.

(Transportation Communications International Union PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:













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.
Form 1 Award No. 32412
Page 2 Docket No. CL-32124
98-3-94-3-528



On October 25, 1993, Chief Clerk L. B. Chambers marked off sick on Job 5101 (7:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M.). Clerk G. A. Nunnery was rearranged from Settegast Messenger to the Chief Clerk's position. The Organization asserts that action was improper and that Claimant should have been offered the position.


Rule 9(d) states that "Employes . . . who wish to be called in the rearrangement of force . . . will so advise the Terminal Manager in writing, stating which positions they wish to be called for in rearrangement of the regular assigned force in that office."


According to the Organization, "Mr. Nunnery was not on the rearrangement for Chief Clerks Jobs, he was down for overtime only." In support, the Organization offered an undated move up list which did not have Nunnery's name designated for move up. The Carrier, however, asserts that "Mr. Nunnery had requested in writing to the Terminal Manager, Mr. J. W. Perry, to be rearranged to work Chief Clerk." In support of that position, the Carrier offered the statement of Terminal Manager Perry which stated "Mr. Nunnery has submitted a request several times and pulled it off on several times, and this will explain why he was not on the undated move up list furnished by the TCU. On the date in question Mr. Nunnery did in fact have a request filed in writing and properly placed on the position."


Based on the above, the Organization has not carried its burden to show that Nunnery had not indicated his desire in writing to move up in accord with Rule 9(d). Instead, the evidence from Terminal Manger Perry shows that Nunnery had, in fact, made such a request in writing which was in effect at the time covered by the claim.





Form 1 Award No. 32412
Page 3 Docket No. CL-32124
98-3-94-3-528



This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.


                      NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD By Order of Third Division


                      Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of January 1998.