C SPECIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTtiENT N0. 122
 0
 P THE PITTSEURGH AND LAIC; ERIE RAILROA.D COMPANY Award No. 31
 Y TO LAPS: ERIE AND EASTERN PKILRCAD C016'ANY Case No. 41
 vs
 BROTHERHOOD OF RAIWAY AND STF=EIP CTXRKS,
 FREIGHT HANDLERS, EXPRESS AND STATION EIH'LOYES

 STATEMENT OF CUIM:

 Claim of Baggage and Mail Handler F. H. Andracki for eight (8) hours each for the following tours of duty:

account Group 1 Seniority District DIo. 10 employees performing Group 2 Seniority District No. 33 work, when he was on his rest days and available for work and not called. (CL-279)

 FINDINGS: The Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

 The Carrier or Carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934.

 The Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein. The parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

 The phrase UI cannot find any basis for your claimP9 is a sufficient statement, under Rule 43 (a), of the Carrier's reasons for the denial. All that the rule requires is that a reason be given. Whether such stated reason is good or bad, succinctly stated or given full length treatment, it nevertheless suffices under the language of the Rule.

 The evidence refutes the assertion that Foremen in the Pittsburgh
 Package Room intruded upon the work sphere of Group 2, Seniority 33 employees.
 Ai9ARD: Claim denied.


Harold M. Gilden, Neutral and Only Member Thereof Pittsburgh, Pa. April 24, 1958.