Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 35418
Docket No. MW-32564
01-3-95-3-488

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Robert M. O'Brien when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes 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. 35418
Page 2 Docket No. MW-32564




On February 9, 1994, the Carrier determined that a special project was needed to correct a sinking track at Mile Post 43.5 on its Monongahela Secondary. This project involved the dumping of ballast and rip-rap to shore up the sinking track. A Foreman was required to supervise Track Department employees on the project which involved a significant amount of overtime.


Under Rule 17 on this property employees will be given preference for overtime on work ordinarily and customarily performed by them during the course of their work week or day in the order of their seniority if they are qualified and available for the overtime work.


It is the Organization's contention that the Carrier violated Rule 17 when it did not assign the Claimant as Foreman on the project at Mile Post 43.5 on the Monongahela Secondary. The Organization contends that the Claimant ordinarily and customarily performs Track Foreman's work on the Monongahela Secondary during the course of his normal workweek. Therefore, he should have been assigned as Foreman on this project rather than Foreman Bossola who was junior to the Claimant.


The Carrier maintains that on February 9, 1994, Track Supervisors L. Kubiak and N. J. Busia explained the project to the Claimant and offered the Foreman's position to him. However, he declined stating that he could not work the amount of hours needed for the job at this point in time. The Claimant denied being offered overtime on the job, however.


Unfortunately, the Board is unable to reconcile the statements of Track Supervisors Kubiak and Busia on the one hand and the conflicting statement of the Claimant on the other hand. Naturally, if the overtime work at issue in this dispute was offered to the Claimant, the senior Foreman, there was no violation of Rule 17. Conversely, if it was not offered to the Claimant but rather to a Foreman junior to him Rule 17 was violated.


In the light of this irreconcilable conflict in a fact that is essential to resolve this dispute we have no choice but to dismiss the claim under established precedents of this Board. (See Third Division Awards 29555 and 29546 between these same parties.)

Form 1 Award No. 35418
Page 3 Docket No. MW-32564
01-3-95-3-488



      Claim dismissed.


                        ORDER


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 26th day of April, 2001.