"Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

1. The Agreement was violated when the Carrier bulletined foreman and

machine operator positions at Meridian, Mississippi as SouthRail positions,

rather than MidSouth Rail Corporation foreman and machine operator.

' positions (Carrier's File M0498 5173).

2. As a consequence of the violation referred to in Part (1) above, Foreman

H. Everett and Machine Operator L. D. Gilmore '... should be allowed the

MidSouth wage for the pay classification that they were assigned to .

beginning February 17, 1998. ""' "

The Board, upon the whole record and on the evidence, finds that the parties herein are Carrier and Employees within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended; that this Board is duly constituted by agreement of the parties; that the Board has jurisdiction over the dispute, and that the parties were given due notice of the hearing.

The instant Claim arose due to the configuration of the former MidSouth and SouthRail trackage acquired by Carrier. For purposes of this decision, the former MidSouth territory ran essentially east-west from Shreveport, Louisiana to Meridian, Mississippi. The portion of the former SouthRail operation involved in this dispute ran generally north-south within the State of Mississippi from Corinth to Waynesboro. The two lines intersected at the common terminal of Meridian, Mississippi.

Award No. 6 Page 2

Although Claimants apparently held seniority on the former MidSouth roster, prior to the emergence of this Claim their positions had them working on the former SouthRail territory and headquartered at Waynesboro, which was a point exclusively on the SouthRail territory.

The Organization concedes that Claimant's former positions were abolished on February 6, 1998 and the same positions with the same gang number were rebulletined as SouthRail positions to be headquartered at Meridian. Nevertheless, the Organization asserted that Claimants were entitled to be paid under the applicable MidSouth agreement because of two factors: One, because Claimants held MidSouth seniority, and, two, because Meridian, Mississippi was a point on the forma MidSouth territory. The Organization also contended that sever- ^ules supported its position.

Careful examination of the rules upon which the Organization relies reveals that they pertain to the performance of work and not the headquarters location. Moreover, the Organization has not refuted the Carrier's assertion that Claimant's new positions did not have them performing any work on the former MidSouth territory.

The Organization had the burden of proof to establish all of the requisite elements of its Claim. On this record, we are compelled to find that it has failed to do so.