F orm 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7195
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7090
2-Spr-MA-276





Parties to Disrute:

( Southern Pacific Transportation Company

Dispute: _ Claim of Employes:





Findings:

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

The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute 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.



On December 23, 1974, C:_aimant was notifiea of a formal hearing in connection with an allegation that he was away from his post of duty without proper authority, and in possession of an alcoholic beverage when observed in his vehicle in the parkiq~ lot.

Subsequent to the investigation, Carrier determined that Claimant was guilty, as charged, and dism~.ssed him from service.

The Organization has asserted that the Carrier did not handle the case in accordance with the teens of the controlling Agreement, to the prejudice of the Claimant, and it refers to the failure of the Hearing Officer to produce Claimant's timecard at the investigation. Based upon the tesCI_mony 0.-14' ~-ecorr' , and certain admissions made by Claimant, we do not concur 1U. -it the allega6ion concerning the timecard is sufficient to set aside the findings.
Form 1 Page 2

Award No. 7195

Docket No. 7090

2-Spr-MA-'76


At the investigation, the Claimant conceded that he did not have authorization before he left his place of employment and went to his automobile. Although he attempts to justify the departure, based on certain assertions that he had advised Carrier Officials that he was Mt feeling well, we find that the evidence was sufficient to substantiate the Company's findings.

Moreover, we note that the charge against Claimant asserts that Claimant was in possession of an alcoholic beverage when observed in his car. We feel that the testimony of record is sufficient to substantiate findings of guilty in that regard. Claimant's assertion that the container of liquid had been left in his car, on the front seat, on the preceding evening was obviously not afforded credibility by the Carrier. It is, of course, not our function to substitute our judgment for that of Carrier in these types of cases, as long as its cred_bility determinations have a basis in the record.

We find substantial evidence of record, including the testimony of Claimant, to support the finding of guilt, and we cannot state that the quantum of discipline was inappropriate to the offense.

A W A R D

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUS TMtNT BOARD

By Order of Second Division


By -
semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 3rd day of December, 1976.