Form 1 NATIONAL RAMROAD ADJUST= BOARD Award No. 8214
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 8024
 2-B&0-BM-' $0



Parties to Disnute: (Boilermakers)
 (
 ( Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company

 DisL=te · Claim of P:ployes




Findings
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, -°inds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of tine Railway Labor Pict as approved.June 21, 19340

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

Claimant, Paul Cordon, a Boilermc.ker employed at Carrier's Cuxberland Locomotive facility, Cu:reerland, Maryland, was dismissed frc-m service of the Carrier following an investigation held August 29, 1977 in which Claimant was charged with theft and removal of company property and subsequently found guilty.
to 11:00 P.M., Claimant requested of an Extra Supervisor that he be furnished a
 quantity of #1 copper cable to be used as an electrical lead on. a welder. At tire
 hearin, the 7xtra Sz.pervisor testified that Clw:~.ant told iii: the ccrp°r cw*10l ^ re
 requested was needed as a repl aeenent for a defective electrical lead on the
 welder assi--n°d for his use in the stloo. 1iolv'eVer, Claa_lant t.3tifed he told ti:~
 Extra Supervisor he needed the cable for the machine he was using and that the
 Extra Supervisor just assiuned that he meant his shop ,:elder when in fact Cla;.mant
 was referring to his privaotely owned welder which he used in working on free lance
 Form 1 Page 2

 Award No. 8214

Docket No. 8024

2-B&O-B2d-' 80


jobs at home. In response to Claimant's request, the Extra Supervisor directed an

 Electrician Helper to cut approximately a one-hundred (100) foot piece of ,*~ cooper cable and to leave it rolled up in the Water Bay area. At about 8:30 P..T.T., Clai:: ant
 according to his own testimony, removed the copper cable from the company's premises and put the cable in his truck. According to a statement by a co-worker, a Pipefitter, and Claimant's further testimony, the Pipefit ten observed Claimant removing the cable and putting the cable in the track. At about 10:45 P.M. , fifteen minutes before the tour of duty ended, the Pipefitter reported to the Assistant Supexir tendent of Production that he had observed Claimant taking the copper cable. The Assistant Superintendent in turn contacted the Claimant about the cable and advised him to return the cable, which Claimant did the following day, August 22, 1977. Subsequently, the Pipefitter made a fox-aal complaint to bhe Assistant Yanager of Shops thereby causing an investigation.

 The Board has examine, the record carefully and thoroughly and we conclude the Claimant received a fair and impartial investigation. Furthermore, the record clearly establishes as reflected by Claimant's own testimony and admission that he was in fact guilty of taking company property and removing said property from company premises. We find we ca;.~not even allow as mitigating circumstances Claimant's expressed motive that he was just borroT,aing the cable for his ovn personal use and intended all along to return the cable when he was finished, because of the deception he employed when requesting the cable. By his own admission, Claimant stated he did not tell anyone about the intended use of the cable nor did he ask anyone's permission to remove the cable from company premises. Though Claimant might have in fact returned the cable on his uvm, this Board will never have the benefit or knowing whether that would ha-,re actually occurred had he not been observed taking the cable and subsequently advised to bring the cable back. The preponderance of evidence contained in the record proves Claimant was guilty of theft as charged and we so affirm.

 Claim denied.

 Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTl`~1EM BOARD

By Order of Second Division


G~'

:BY

Dated.-at Chicago, Illinois, this 9th day of January 1980.