Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 731+1
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7182
 2-A&S-CM- ` 77



Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)


Dispute: Claim of Frnroloyes:



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, 193+.

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

Claimant is a Cayman employed at Carrier's Fast St. Louis, Illinois shops, with approximately six (o) and one-half (2) years` seniority.

 Somewhere around 9:55 PM on July 17, 1975, Claimant TAras observed by Carrier's Trainmaster and a Special Agent, sitting across a desk from one of Carrier's Foremen, Lewis M. DeRossett, in the office on the second level of the mechanical facility. Between the Foreman and Claimant was a chess board, with the chess pieces all set up on the board fox a game of chess.

 An investigation was held on July 29, 1975, and, as a result, Claimant was notified by letter dated July 30, 1975, that he -was being assessed "90 days actual suspension."
 Form 1 Award No. 7341
 Page 2 Docket No. 7182

This suspension was for Claimant's allegedly being involved in a game of chess while on duty, rather than performing his assigned duties.

 Petitioner alleges that Superintendent Needham's failure to allege reasons for declining the claim in his August 15, 1975 letter to the Local Chairman is fatal to the procedural requirement of Article V of the August 21, 1954 Agreement.



The Board finds that if said letter of Superintendent Needham did not comply with the pertinent provisions of Article V, then the defect was cured by letter of Chief Mechanical Officer Tutko to the General Chairman dated September 10, 1975. Article V does not require that the Officer receiving the claim must, in the case of declination, make the notice of disallowance and state the reasons fox such disallowance. Article V says the "Carrier shall ... notify... ." Therefore, inasmuch as the Carrier, through Chief Mechanical

 Officer Tutko, within 60 days from the date the claim was filed, did notify Claimant's General Chairman in writing and gave reasons fox such disallowance: then Petitioner's claim of a procedural defect must be rejected. (See Second Division Award 5124).
Turning to the merits of the case at hand, there is evidence to indicate that Claimant was playing a game of chess with Foreman DeRossett, although neither the Trainmaster nor the Special Agent saw any of the chess pieces being moved on the board.

 In light of all the circumstances in the instant case, however, the Board finds that 90 days actual suspension was excessive. In industrial relations as well as in social relations, the punishment should fit the crime, and we are convinced that under all the facts and circumstances of this case, the penalty of 90 days actual suspension was too severe.

 Therefore, we will reduce the penalty from 90 days actual suspension to 45 days actual suspension. Claimant is to be compensated fox all regular time lost during the other 45 days he was suspended. There is no provision for the awarding of interest on back pay in the applicable Agreement, and, consequently, we are precluded from awarding such.
 Form 1 Award No. 731+1
 Page 3 Docket No. 7182
 2-A&S-CM-'77

    Claim upheld to the extent indicated above.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By

 4semarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of September, 1977·
 ,"Mo~