' (.',. ·:r.-,,( :'~,..`.~'-I i:-

S1'?C-f/J, PO:R,> W: At>·LS'i;`i' t:0. uC,5

PARTIES ) Brothcrl;ood o` Dc ilroad ~i_or._l:n::n
TO ) ar,d
DISPUii: ) 1;e.~dia;; Corpa;:y
QUI;STIOi.
AT ISSUE: Should Carrier be rauuircd to pay L%:,din~; Si^:~al::,,_

P. 4;ciden'i.^,..: .~r, SiSna1. .u:i.i!tain.^rs J. iF. »: : ..,.,

'N. P. Dclp, and :1s,s ist:a:a ~~C.,e.ln._.. P, l.c:rl;, i~: ore c-'Y's :, e

p::)' each at th:'.i.r Tc::pi;Ct':i.vC ri.WS O:. 1W:y ii(.~<... ~..

suspended their positions on July 7.7, 19'v'l ~:;:_:. ,. S':: ,

Craft,; strilco without -,ivin-; tli-m si_.acen hou::; ~,~.,

noi:i.cc as rcc;ui;:-ed by Sectioa 4 of Article 1: of t"--
February 7, 1965 ASroc:.:c:nt.
OPINICI
OF BOARD: Consistent with ti:> Opinion and Award in A.:=d I'D. 7_15
(Case No. SG-17-7.), the Board finds tl-~ct Section I
of Article I does not apply when positions arc not
abolished but only suspended.
AWARD

The answer to the question presented is in the negative.

'r ~

Nicholas 11. ' umas

Neutral i:e: r

Dated: Washington, D. C.
June 24, 1969