PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
        Chicago & North Western Transportation Company


    STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:


    (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it used employes junior in seniority to Machine Operators M. D. Davis and D. E. Corwin to fill temporary vacancies as tamper operators during the period November 6, 1981 and December 10, 1981. (Organization File 4T-2833; Carrier File 81-3-247)


    (2) The Claimants shall be compensated for the difference in wages between the Trackman's and Machine Operator's rate for all time worked by the junior operators: during the claim period.


OPINION OF THE BOARD:
 This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds and
 holds that the Employe and the Carrier involved in this dispute are
 respectively Employe and Carrier within the meaning of the Railway Labor
 Act, as amended, and that.the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
 involved herein.
 The Claim contends that the Carrier violated Rule 16 and Claimant
 Davis' seniority rights as a machine operator pursuant to Rule 4 when
 they used a junior employe, L. R. Bachman, to operate a machine on
                                                    2


Surfacing Crew 702 on November 6 to December 10, 1981. They also claim
 under similar circumstances that Claimant Corwin's seniority rights were
 violated when the .Carrier used a junior employe, J. J. Schulte, to operate
 a machine.
 It is also noted as factual background that the Claimants' positions
 as machine operators on Surfacing Crew 702 were abolished at the close of
 work on November 6, 1981. The Claimants exercised their seniority to
 trackman's positions at the Tama Welding Plant.
 Rules 4 and 16 are quoted below:
                    "Rule 4 - Seniority


      "(a) Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, seniority of new employes begins at the time an employe's pay starts.


      "When two or more employes enter the service on the same day in the same class and seniority district, their relative

. standing on the seniority roster will be determined by their
      attained ages, the oldest employe being placed first.


      "An employe who voluntarily leaves the service of the Company shall, if re-employed, rank as a new employe.

    . "(c) Rights accruing to employes under their seniority entitle

      . them to consideration for positions in accordance with their relative length of service with the Company."


          "Rule 16 - Bulletining New Positions and Vacancies


      "(b) Vacancies of less than thirty (30) calendar days duration may be filled without bulletining, except that senior qualified employes in the district and group will be given perferred (sic) consideration.


      "Vacancies of less than thirty (30) calendar days in machine operator p.>sitions will first be filled by employes holding seniority zs Machine Operators but not working as such. If there are no such employes holding seniority as Machine Operators, consideration will then be given to Track Department employes who have on file written request with Assistant Division ManagerEngineering for such consideration, prior to assignment of others. No seniority will be established for employes filling these positions on this basis."

                                                ~9eo - 6s


                                            . 3


With respect to Corwin, it is noted that the Carrier claims, without refutation, that Schulte was assigned to gang 702 at the time Corwin's job . was abolished. In view of this being accepted, the fact that Corwin suffered a reduction in wages was a result of his failure to exercise his seniority rights over Schulte at the time his position was abolished and not due to any action of the Carrier.
 With respect to Davis, it is noted that the vacancy Bachman was assigned to was a vacancy of less than thirty (30) days and thus, pursuant to Rule 16(b), it need not be bulletined.. Therefore, it places the burden on an employe to express an interest in the position if they desire their seniority to be given "preferred consideration." There is no evidence in this record that the Claimant expressed such interest, therefore, there is no evidence he was denied preference consideration based on his seniority rights granted under Rule 4.

 AWARD:
    The Claim is denied.


              W Vernon, airman


H. G. ~Aarpimp o Member '-Crawford, arrfer Member

 Dated:~~