(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and ( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, ( Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (The Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad Company

(a) The Carrier violated the Rules Agreement, effective September 1, 1946, particularly Rule 20, when it assessed discipline of 15 days suspension on R. P. Cook, Relief Crew Dispatcher Centralized Crew Dispatching Office, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

 (b) Claimant R. P. Cook's record be cleared of the charges brought against him on January 6, 1975.

 (c) Claimant R. P. Cook be compensated for wage loss sustained during the period out of service.

 OPINION OF BOARD: On December 31, 1974, Claimant was notified to
 attend an investigation (on January 3, 1975) for an
 alleged failure to properly call a Fireman for a passenger train.
 Claimant did not appear at the investigation - which was conducted in
 absentia. On January 6, 1975, Claimant was notified of a reprimand for
 the substance of the asserted violation. On the same day, he was notified
 to attend an investigation concerning an alleged violation of Rule (T)B-1
 of Carrier's General Rules.

 The asserted violation of Rule (T)B-1 related to the failure to report for the January 3, 1975 investigation. Carrier assessed a fifteen (15) day suspension for that asserted violation.

 At the second investigation, Claimant presented a reason for his failure to attend the original investigation, but we do not feel that it is necessary to explore that concept.

 Carrier argues that Claimant's failure to attend the initial investigation constituted insubordination and it cites Award No. 15059 of this Division. But, we feel that First Division Award 20479 more clearly
 specifies the controlling concepts. There, the Board determined that an °~.
 employe may voluntarily waive his rights to be present and protect his
 interests at his investigation, and that such a waiver is not an act of
 insubordination.


If an employe refuses to attend his investigation, he may very , well be compelled to abide by the outcome of the investigation held in absentia (see Award 20113). But, we find no basis to conclude that the failure to attend constitutes an act of insubordination.

        FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


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

        That the Agreement was violated.


                    A W A R D


        Claim sustained.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: ~. 6.d~

        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 31st day of October 1977.