Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7553
SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 7433
2-WT-CM-'78





Parties to Dispute: ( (Carmen)



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.



Claimant was suspended on July 26, 1976, for his actions in relation to two of the Carrier's security officers on that date, following an incident which had occurred with one of the officers the previous day. Following a fair and impartial hearing, the Claimant was dismissed from service on August 23, 1976.

The Carrier determined from the investigative hearing that the Claimant had refused to give the security officers answers to reasonable questions as to his name and status and had subsequently become resistant and belligerent. While other testimony was offered to suggest that the security officers had been provocative in their conduct, the record does
Form 1
Page 2

Claim denied.

Attest: Executive Secretary
National Railroad Adjustment Board

Award No. 7553
Docket No. 71+33
2-WT-CM-'78

not support a finding that the Carrier acted in an unreasonable or arbitrary fashion in reaching its decision that the Claimant had been disorderly. Whether or not the Claimant was acting in an improper fashion in operating a bicycle on the Carrier's property is not the issue here. What is at issue is is whether or not the Claimant acted in an improper manner on July 25 and July 26, 1976, when questioned. The Board finds no reason to disturb the finding of the Carrier.

The severity of the penalty might be questioned were it not for the previous record of the Claimant, which shows a 30-day suspension only four months earlier for two incidents of threatening supervisors with bodily harm. Had the Claimant taken the earlier disciplinary penalty to heart, it seems clear that he could have so conducted himself as to avoid the confrontation which caused his dismissal. He failed to do so, and the Carrier's action cannot be gainsaid.

A W A R D

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Second Division




Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of June, 1978.