Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 8957
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 9134
 2-L&N-CM-'82
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Edward L. Suntrup when award was rendered.
 ( trotherhood Railway Carmen of the lhited States
 Parties to Dispute: ( and. Canada

 Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

 Di;:pute: 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, Mr. G. B. Reed, is a Carman working for the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company. On February 20, 1979 Claimant was advised by letter from Mr. W. L. Gordon, General Foremen at Carrier's Decoursey Shops near Covington, Kentucky that he was charged with dereliction of duties by being absent from his job without permission from his supervisor on the second shift, February 15,
 197'). After a formal investigation was held on this issue on Niarch 28, 1979 in
 Award No. 8957 1=~°.. ;G oDocket No. 9134 2-L&N-CM-'82

 ":-"~e office of the Assistant Master Mechanic, the Claimant was notified on April 26, 1979 by the Carrier that he was being assessed thirty (30) actual calendar days off without pay.

 This case centers on both the whereabouts, as well as the manner in which Claimant was utilizing his time, from approximately 7:30 P.M. on February 15, 1979 to approximately 9-9:30 P. M. on that same day. According to testimony at the hearing Claimant and a co-worker, Mr. J. B. Hood, were diverted from their regular assignments under the supervision of Mr. H. Bentley to perform some work for Second Shift Rip Track Foreman, Mr. C. L. Smith. This work, assigned to Claimant and his co-worker about 5:20 P.M. entailed repairs or., the rip track where an accident had occurred earlier that evening. This work was finished by Messrs. Hood and the Claimant at approximately 7:30 P. M. Mr. Hood reported back, thereafter, to Mr. Bentley, his regular foreman for Heavy Repairs ,nssignments, whereas Mr. Reed, the Claimant, did not until approximately 9-9:30 P.M.

 A close reading of the hearing minutes can only permit one to conclude that only Claimant himself knew for sure where he was and what he was doing during this ,job assignment hiatus of approximately two hours. At the very least it is clear that he was not under assignment from either Mr. Bentley, his regular foreman, nor Mr. C. L. Smith, his temporary foreman, after approximately 7:30 P.M. until about 9-9:30 P.M. on the date in question. This is corroborated by testimony.

 The function of the Board, in this and other discipline cases is to ascertain, in its appellate role, if substantial evidence is present as basis for disciplinary measures taken by Carrier. In this case, the test of substantial evidence has been met and the Board will not overturn the discipline imposed by the Carrier. The Board also notes that insubordination can occur without a stated refusal to comply on the part of an employee, as the Board has held in prior cases (See Second Division Awards Nos. 7128 and 7193). In this case the Claimant did not refuse to comply with orders because neither foreman was able to give him orders because of his unknown whereabouts during the time in question.




                            By Order of Second Division


Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 :% JRosemarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 3rd day of March, 1982.