Dispute: Claim of ~mployes:

(1) That Machinist Helper J. M. Miller was improperly dismissed from service on Jane 19, 1974.

(2) That accordingly, Carrier be ordered to restore Machinist Helper J. M. Miller to service, with all rights unimpaired, with pay for lost wages.

Findings:

The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record acid all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier or carriers and the employe or e~nployes involved in this disvute are .respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

This Division of the~Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the -dispute involved herein.

Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.

There is ample evidence in the record in support of the Carrier's dismissal of the Claimant for excessive absenteeism. During 5-21 months of employment, the Claimant was late or absent on 39% of the days including the very first day of his employment. His repeated warnings coupled with promises to improve were to no avail and, on his own admission, his problem relatt® the fract he did not like his job.

The Employees suggest that a reprimand rather than dismissal would be appropriate. We do not agree. The Carrier had the right to impose discipline so long as the penalty was not arbitrary, capricious nor discriminatory. The record. indicates these factors were nonexistent and the investigation was conducted. in a fair and impartial manner. Further, the seriousness of the offense justified the Claimant's dismissal. During his brief employment he received at least three reprimands for absenteeism and the Carrier should expect a,better effort than this.

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division

By _ a

R semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant