Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 38091
Docket No. MW-37264
07-3-02-3-272

The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Gerald E. Wallin when award was rendered.

(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Union Pacific Railroad Company (former Chicago & ( North Western Transportation Company)

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:





FINDINGS:

The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:
Form 1 Award No. 38091
Page 2 Docket No. MW-37264
07-3-02-3-272

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.




It is undisputed that the Claimants were on furlough status in Seniority District 9 on the dates of the claim when record snowfall struck the region. The fact of the heavy snowfall is documented in the record and agreed to by the Organization. It is further undisputed that three employees holding seniority in District 3 were allowed to work in the Claimants' seniority district during the claim period clearing and/or removing snow while the Claimants did not participate in the recovery efforts.


Notwithstanding the foregoing facts, a statement in the record from a Carrier official asserted that one of the Claimants was personally offered the opportunity to perform the snow fighting work and the other two Claimants were called at their phone numbers of record with a similar work offer. Moreover, according to the statement, work was available for anyone who wanted it and the Carrier took various steps to disseminate this information as widely as possible under the circumstances. While the Organization alleged certain deficiencies in the contents of the statement, the record contains no first-hand evidence whatsoever in opposition to it. Significantly, there were no statements from any of the three Claimants to challenge the assertions contained in the statement.


Given the foregoing circumstances, we must find that the Organization failed to satisfy its burden of proof to establish a violation of the Agreement as alleged in the claim.

Form 1 Award No. 38091
Page 3 Docket No. MW-37264
07-3-02-3-272







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


                      By Order of Third Division


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 21st day of February 2007.