On February 8, 2000 the Claimant's Signal Repairman I position on Tour A7A was abolished and re-advertised for bid. Subsequently, he sought to displace another employee in a Signal Repairman I position on Tour BT-2, based on the fact that he had greater signal division seniority than that employee. However, the Claimant's request was denied because the employee he sought to displace had greater seniority in that classification.
In support of the claim the Organization relies on Article VI, C, Section 2 that provides, in relevant part, that "(e)mployees who retain and accumulate seniority in any class of employment . . . shall be allowed. . , to exercise such seniority . . . for. . . bidding . . ." and the fact that in an earlier claim of a similar type the Carrier resolved the matter consistent with this position of the Organization. The Carrier points out, however, that in Article VI, C, Section 3 the parties explicitly defined "seniority" to be ". . . without qualification . . . class seniority."
We agree with the Carrier. In defining seniority as the parties have, the Claimant's class seniority was less than that of the employee he sought to displace. His request to do so was properly denied.
The Organization also claims that because the Carrier settled another claim consistent with the Organization's position in this matter the Carrier was obligated to do so again. We disagree. One such incident does not rise to the level of a binding obligation. (See e.g., Third Division Awards 23943 and 25870.)
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.