( Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the District Committee of the Brotherhood (Case


(1) The Agreement governing hours of service and working conditions was violated at Newark, N.J. doing, acted unjustly, unfairly and unreasonably, and:

(2) Furthermore, the decision of dismissal was extremely harsh, since the record of the investigation discloses that the claimant was severely disciplined prior to the investigation, and:

(3) Claimant Horace Brown shall now be returned to service with seniority unimpaired and compensated for all time lost.

OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant, an over-the-road driver was discharged on May
9, 1972 following investigation into charges contained in a letter dated May 1, 1972, as follows:

















The facts surrounding this claim are not in dispute. Claimant admitted at the investigative hearing that he had transported in his truck an unauthorized passenger on his run between Newark, New Jersey and Temple Hills, Maryland on the night of April 29, 1972. The uncontroverted record shows that he was removed from service by the Line Haul Manager in Temple Hills, Maryland at 2:30 A.:f, on April 30 and told to get back to Newark, New Jersey by his own devices as best he could. Accordingly, Claimant walked and hitchhiked to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, whence a relative transported him to Newark where he arrived some thirty (30) hours later.

Petitioner contends that management by the above-described action of the Line Haul Manager administered discipline without applying the proper rules. Upon a careful review of the record and the applicable Agreement, we find that the situation in which Claimant was placed by local management on April 30, though deplorable, was not in and of itself discipline without a hearing.

Petitioner further grounds its appeal of Claimant's discharge on the premise that the quantum of punishment was harsh and unreasonable, particularly in light of Clai
Based on the entire record and considering all the circumstances in the case, we find that Claimant received a fair and impartial investigation and that he was subject to discipline; but we consider permanent dismissal to be excessive in this case and hold that Claimant should be restored to service with seniority and other rights unimpaired, but without pay for time lost while out of service.





That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

,.~ ; 1








Claim sustained to the extent and in the manner set forth in the Opinion.


                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~~// /~
Executive Secretary

Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 25th day of January 1974.