Referee Fred Blackwell


Carrier Member: J. H. Burton Labor Member: W. E. LaRue

 PARTIES TO DISPUTE: -

        BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYEES


        VS.


        CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 Claim of the Brotherhood (CR-1799) that:

      (a) The Carrier has violated the current Schedule Agreement, as amended, particularly Rules 3, 4, and 40, when the position of Bridge and Building Plumber 106-at Pitcairn, Pennsylvania, was awarded to T. J. Koessler instead of senior applicant and Claimant in this case, S. D. Ferris.


      (b) Claimant S. D. Ferris, a vehicle operator, shall be granted a seniority date as a plumber on the B&B Plumber Roster, Pittsburgh Seniority District, and paid the difference in the rate of pay between a vehicle operator and plumber, including all overtime granted to the plumber position in Gang 106, commencing on February 28, 1985, and continuing until the claimant was granted a leave of absence as provided for by Rule 7 - - of the collective bargaining agreement.


    FINDINGS:


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.


                        OPINION =


        The Claimant asserts that the Carrier improperly awarded


                          1

          P. L. 3781_/ Award No. 43 - Case No. 43 (79)


an advertised Plumber's vacancy to junior employee Koessler, whereas the Carrier should have awarded the position to the Claimant on overall seniority since neither the Claimant nor Mr. Koessler held seniority in the Plumber's class at the time in question; that the Carrier should have, but did not, treat the Claimant's application for- the Plumber's position as a Rule 3, Section 2. request to demonstrate his qualifications to perform the position; and that the Carrier's actions in these respects were violative of the applicable agreement.

The Carrier asserts that Mr. Koessler was found qualified for the Plumber vacancy on the basis of his having been upgraded to plumber work on several prior occasions; that the Claimant made no request to be allowed to demonstrate his qualifications to perform the Plumber position: and that no agreement violation occurred.

After due study of the whole record, inclusive of the
 submissions presented by the parties in support of their positions
 in the case, the Board concludes that the claim is not supported
 by the record and hence must be denied. More specifically, the
 Carrier's information about Mr. Koessler's prior upgrade to plumb
 er work is sufficient to support the Carrier's treatment of this
 employee as qualified for the position. In addition, the Board
 has considered but finds no merit in the contention that the Car
 rier should have construed the claimant's job bid, in combination
 with his prior work experience, as a Rule 3, section 2. request to
 2
          P. L. 3781_/ Award No. 43 - Case No. 43 (79)


demonstrate his qualifications for the Plumber position. Since the text of Rule 3, Section 2. contemplates a "written request" by the employee for the opportunity to make such demonstration, and since no such "written request" is shown of record, it cannot be said that the intended requirement of Rule 3, Section 2., has been met. For similar rulings see Third Division-Award No. 27631= (11-23-88) and Award No. 14__(05-28-86) of this Board, Public Law ..y
                                    tM8


Board No. 3781. -
 Accordingly, on the whole record, the claim cannot be said to be meritorious and hence it will be denied.

 AWARD? _

        Claim denied.


        BY ORDER OF PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 3781.


                Fred Blackwell, Neutral Member


3. H. Burton, Carrier Member W. E. LaRue, Labor Member

 Executed on Q~' , 199_0

 CONRAIL\3781\43-79.418

                          3