Certain jobs were abolished and employees were furloughed. They then claimed the right to perform work which was performed by other bargaining unit employees as well as individuals not covered by the collective bargaining agreement.

The Carrier contends that the Organization has failed to identify the claims at issue and that it has failed to submit any proof concerning alleged violations of the agreement. The Carrier also points out that the Claimant could have been working during the period of time in question, but voluntarily opted to refuse to exercise seniorty after the furlough.

Basically, the case deals with the work of removing ice and snow from switches and road crossings. The Carrier asserts that said work has never been the exclusive work of any particular craft and certainly not maintenance of way employees, since train crews do this type of work incidental to their operation and welders consistently perform the work in question.

Regardless of the contention advanced by the Carrier that no specific claims have been set forth in the detail necessary to establish a viable dispute, we question that the evidence of record approaches the type of proof necessary to show that the work belongs to this maintenance of way employee or that there is a requirement that the work in the particular geographic area should have been distributed to these employees. Accordingly, we will deny the claim.

Findings