PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
Form 1
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 33649
Docket No. SG-33974
99-3-97-3-489
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Robert Perkovich when award was rendered.
(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
(CSX Transportation, Inc. (former Seaboard Coast Line
( Railroad Company)
"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of
Railroad Signalmen on the CSX Transportation Company (former
Seaboard Coast Line):
Claim on behalf of D.A. Doring for payment of the difference
between the Electronic Specialist rate and theAssistant Signalman rate for
all hours worked, beginning July 22, 1996, and continuing until the
Claimant is allowed to exercise his rights to displace onto an Electronic
Specialist position, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, particularly Rule 34, when it denied the Claimant the right to
exercise his seniority rights in the Electronic Specialist classification after
he was demoted from a management position. Carrier's File No. 15(96218). General Chairman's File No.
10262-SCL."
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.
Form 1
Page 2
herein.
Award No. 33649
-490
Docket No. SG-33974
99-3-97-3-489
This Division
of
the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved
Parties to said dispute were given due notice
of
hearing thereon.
Claimant was promoted from an Electronic Signal Specialist to a position
of
Signal Supervisor, a position he held for approximately four years. When he was
demoted from the supervisory position he attempted to displace back into an Electronic
Signal Specialist position. However, the Carrier refused to permit him to do so,
contending that inasmuch as the two positions involved essentially the same type
of
work, because the Claimant was not qualified for one, he was therefore not qualified for
the other. In addition, the Carrier contended that under the parties' Agreement it had
the unfettered right
of
selection.
The record shows that well after the facts giving rise to the dispute and after the
matter was processed to the Board, the Claimant and the Carrier entered into an
agreement that included a release by the Claimant
of
any rights that he had or might
·r
have had against the Carrier. As a result
of
the release (and we see no reason why the
release should not be deemed binding) the Board concludes that the Claimant
terminated the viability
of
his claim and removed it from the Board's jurisdiction. Thus,
the claim is dismissed as moot. See Third Division Awards 20832, 26470 and 29408.
AWARD
Claim dismissed.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration
of
the dispute identified above, hereby orders that
an award favorable to the Claimants) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order
of
Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day
of
November 1999.