PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

          Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees


                          and


          CSX Transportation, Inc.


STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

 Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

      1. The Carrier violated Appendix No. 34 of the Agreement

      when it allowed Welder R. K.- Orr and his Helper to perform

      Track Repairman's duties (spreading ties, pulling spikes,

      applying anchors, and removing splices) while making field

      welds at 20 different locations on the Memphis Subdivision

      between Mile Post 263.7 and Mile Post 361.1 and on the

      Bruceton Subdivision at Mile Post 11.7 on September 1, 2, 3,

      7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 28, 1993.

      [System File 14(63)(93)/12(94-47) LNR].


      2. As a consequence of the aforestated violation, Track

      Subdepartment employees R. D. Davidson and J. T. Pruitt

      shall be paid eight (8) hours' straight time pay at their

      appropriate Trackman Repairman's rate of pay for each day

      during September 1993 that the violation occurred.


FINDINGS:

 This Board, upon the whole record and all of the evidence, finds and holds as follows:

 1. That the Carrier and the Employee involved in this dispute are, respectively, Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as amended,; and

      2. That the Board has jurisdiction over this dispute.


OPINION OF THE BOARD:

 Appendix 34 provides, in pertinent part, that:

      in the future on all Seniority Districts of this Company when field welds are being made a track repairman will be assigned to work with the welding gang to perform the track work unless the ties have


                            1

SSA 1110- Awd 146


      already been spread to permit the field weld and that we will not be presented time claims that the welding gang is performing track sub-department work and also time claims that the track repairman is performing welding sub-department work.


This dispute involves a claim about the performance of scope covered work by a Welder and a Welder Helper, who did not possess active seniority under the Agreement in the Track Subdepartment. The Welder and the Welder Helper did possess active seniority under the Agreement in the Welding Subdepartment.

 Rule 3 and Rule 5 differentiate between the Track Subdepartment and the Welding Subdepartment. Employees covered by the Agreement accrue seniority in such different subdepartments.

 The critical inquiry therefore requires a determination of whether the Welder and Welder Helper performed track work incidental to their primary work of welding or whether they performed a substantial and significant quantity of track work that warranted the assignment of the Claimants from the Track Subdepartment to perform such work.

 The record contains a report from the Roadmaster that indicates that Section Forces performed the work of spacing ties. Although the Welder and Welder Helper disagreed with the Roadmaster's statement, the record omits any basis to resolve this factual conflict. As a result, the record omits any persuasive evidence from the Welder or the Welder Helper to support the Organization's position that the Welder and/or the Welder Helper performed track repair work under these precise circumstances on the relevant dates.

 AWARD:

 The Claim is dismissed.

 D nald ~Bartholom
 Employee ember

 Dated: Ib- l --O 1
Robert L. Do~Koas
 Chairman and Neutt`al Member

 Mark D. Selbert Carrier Member