Upon the whole record and all the evidence, after March 20, 1989 hearing in Washington, D. C., the Board finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, and that this Board is duly constituted by agreement and has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter.
The record reflects that after working the 1985 production season as a Trackman-operator in the Southern Tier Seniority District, the Claimant's position was abolished at the end of the production season. The abolishment occurred on October 16, 1985.-As there were no junior Employees in the Southern Tier SeniorityDistrict at the time of the abolishment, the Claimant was fur= loughed from the Southern Tier Seniority District on October 17, 1985. The Claimant at this time did not exercise seniority over junior Repairmen in the Canton Shop Seniority District.
On December 11, 1985, the Claimant was awarded a Repairman position in the Canton Shop Seniority District, whereupon, on December 12, 1985, the Pennsylvania Federation of the BMWE submittted a protest of the award on the basis that the Claimant should have forfeited his seniority at Canton Shop when he failed to exercise his seniority within ten (lo) days after his TrackmanOperator position was abolished on October 16, 1985.
The Carrier sustained the protest of the Pennsylvania Federation and by letter dated April 18, 1986 advised the Claimant that his seniority at Canton Shop was forfeited under Rule 4, Section 2 (b) of the Schedule Agreement.
Appeal to restore the Claimant's Canton Shop seniority was made by the Consolidated Rail System Federation of the BMWE on the basis that extenuating circumstances existed which should have permitted the Claimant to retain his Canton Shop seniority.
The matter was considered on the property, but a mutually satisfactory settlement was not reached, and this dispute result-
After review of the foregoing and of the record as a whole, the Board concludes that extenuating circumstances existed which permitted the claimant to retain his canton Shop seniority and accordingly, his claim will be sustained as hereinafter provided.
More specifically the Board concludes and finds that the Maintenance of Way Chief Clerk at Hornell, New York, advised the Claimant that he was not obligated to exercise his seniority at the Canton, Ohio, Shop as a Repairman when his Trackman-Operator position in the Southern Tier Seniority District was abolished on October 16, 1985.
The Chief Clerk's April 18, 1986 statement which supports this finding reads as follows:
Although the advice of the Chief Clerk at Hornell appears to have been based on a mistaken construction of the application
of the Schedule Agreement and although he does not have authority to interpret the Agreement, the fact that he gave the indicated advice to the Claimant clearly constitutes an extenuating circumstance in the Claimant's behalf under Rule 4, Section 2 (b) of the Schedule Agreement, which renders the seniority forfeiture action inappropriate.
In view of the foregoing, and based on the record as a whole, the Carrier will be directed to reinstate the Claimant to his former position on the System MW Repair Shop Roster at Canton, Ohio.