"Claim of the System Committee of the Organization (GL-12662) that:

The following claim is hereby presented to the Company in behalf of Claimant Mr. M. P. O'Brien

(a) The Carrier violated the Clerks' Rules Agreement effective July 1, 1979, particularly Rules 24, 40 and other rules, when it failed to call and work Claimant Mr. M. P. O'Brien for the Programmer, Symbol 353, hours 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on August 2, 1999 located at the Trail-Van Terminal, Columbus, Ohio and instead assigned and permitted clerk Mr. M. S. Fickell to work this position after being sick from July 30 and 31, 1999 and would not be available to work overtime until he had worked his regular position at 11:00 p.m. on August 3, 1999.

(b) Claimant Mr. M. P. O'Brien must now be allowed eight (8) hours pay at the appropriate punitive rate of pay for August 2, 1999 on account of this violation.

(c) Claimant is qualified was available and should have been worked in accordance with Rules 24, 40.

(d) This claim has been presented in accordance with Rule 45 and must be allowed.

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 were given due notice of hearing thereon.

The Organization initiated a claim contending that the Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned a clerical employee junior to the Claimant to work a Programmer position on August 2, 1999 at the Carrier's Trail-Van Terminal in Columbus, Ohio. However, the Organization progressed the claim to the Board solely on the issue of time limits. Thus, the Board dismisses the merits of the claim for want of prosecution.

The record reflects that the Carrier received the claim on August 5, 1999. The Carrier's denial letter was postmarked October 4, 1999, the 60th day following the Carrier's receipt of the claim. The Organization's District Chairman received the denial letter on October 5, 1999, the 61st day following the Carrier's receipt of the claim.

The issue in this case is, does the postmarked date on an envelope containing the Carrier's denial letter constitute the material date for purposes of applying the 60-day time limitation in Rule 45(a) of the Agreement?

The Board adjudicated an identical issue in Third Division Award 36095. We ruled that the Rule 45(a) time limitation runs from the date the Carrier receives the claim until the date that the Organization receives the Carrier's denial letter. For the

02-3-00-3-669