(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship ( Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station ( Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Southern Pacific Transportation Company ( Texas and Louisiana Lines

(1) The Carrier violated the current Clerks' Agreement when on June 7, 1974, it arbitrarily and capriciously dismissed Clerk M. J. Prejean from the service of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company, Texas and Louisiana Lines, without just and sufficient cause.

 (2) Clerk Prejean be restored to service with full seniority, vacation and other employe rights rest day's pay for June 7, 1974, and each subsequent date thereafter he could have worked on his regular assignment or through the exercise of his seniority and in addition thereto 2% of all wage loss sustained per month compounded until reinstated to service.

 (3) The Southern Pacific Transportation Company, Texas and Louisiana Lines, be required to clear Clerk Prejean's service record of all charges and discipline assessed in regard to the case at hand.

 OPINION OF BOARD: By letter dated June 7, 1974 Carrier notified
 Claimant M. J. Prejean, a Clerk, that he was dismissed from service for the stated reason that on sp during the period from February 26, 1974 through March 29, 1974 he was responsible for making long distance telephone calls and accepting long distance collect telepho Raceland Junction, Louisiana for claimant's personal use and without authorization, resulting in sai in violation of Rules 801 and 806 of Rules and Regulations of the Transportation Department and General Rules and Regulations dated January 1, 1969. At all times relevant to this proceeding claimant held a second trick position at the subject location, a single Bell Telephone Company telephone was installed there, and claimant was the only employe on duty in this office during his duty hours.


Upon receiving notice of his dismissal, claimant exercised his right under Agreement Rule 25 to request an investigation, which was duly held. Thereafter Carrier reaffirmed the dismissal action for the stated reason that the facts developed in this investigation fully substantiated the original dismissal decision. Testimony and telephone company records presented at the investigation by a Carrier witness were to the effect that from February 26, 1974 through March 29, 1974 a total of 54 unauthorized long distance telephone calls were made from claimant's work location or collect calls were accepted at said location during his tour of duty, and that said calls could have been handled only by claimant or by some other person for whom claimant was responsible. The Organiz the evidence presented by Carrier but the details of this challenge need not be reviewed here for the reason that claimant acknowledges having made various unauthorized long distance telephone calls and having accepted such calls - - all of which were charged to the Carrier.
part: "Employes will not be retained in the service who are dis-
 honest " The relevant portion of above-cited Carrier Rule 806
 reads: "Unless specially authorized,employes must not use the Com
 pany's credit ...." Claimant was authorized to use the single tele
 phone at his work location only for Carrier business. But by also
 using this telephone for personal unauthorized long distance tele
 phone calls, claimant violated both of the foregoing Carrier rules.
 Carrier cannot reasonably be expected to tolerate the dishonesty
 shown by claimant. He was not prejudiced by any of the procedural
 questions raised by the Organization. The "just and sufficient
 cause" criterion specified in Agreement Rule 25 has been met in
 this dismissal action.



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

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










ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 13th day of February 1976.