(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood
 of Railroad Signalmen on the Terminal Railroad
 Association of St. Louis:

 On behalf of Max E. Vitale, dismissed pursuant to letter dated November 12, 1975, for reinstatement with full restitution and seniority restored.

 OPINION OF BOARD: There is no dispute regarding significant facts,
 no question as to a fair hearing, and no claim that
 the agreement was violated. Petitioner contends that dismissal was
 excessive discipline in view of claimant's good service record of some
 22 years, and in view of the absence of physical contact.

 Claimant was dismissed for violation of rule "L" and the fourth sentence of the Carrier's Book of Operating Rules, which read, respectively, as follows:



While it is true no physical contact was made, there is undisputed evidence of Claimant's threats of bodily harm and abusive language accompanied by actions designed to intimidate three carrier officials. Although his actions were undoubtedly prompted by an accumulation of frustrations with an underlying resentment of higher authority, Claimant's conduct clearly goes beyond an acceptable expression of his emotions. In fact, the Brotherhood in its submission to this Board acknowledges that "claimant's offense involved here was a serious matter". i
 . Lacking the threats of bodily harm and actions indicating a
 willingness to implement them, the dismissal penalty might be mitigated
 in view of Claimant's extensive service record. But Claimant's testimony
 at the investigation indicates he lost self-control, and this Board cannot
                    Award Number 21799 Page 2

                    Docket Number SG-21861


say that the carrier should continue in its employment an irresponsible individual, who threatened the safety of his fellow employes, just because his threats of violence were not carried out this time, or because such an individual previously has not acted similarly.

 Claimant's actions were directed against the authority under which he worked. No,personality conflicts were involved. There is no showing that the underlying cause of his violent outburst has been removed.

 There is substantial evidence that the rules in question were violated, and the serious nature of the violation outweighs Petitioner's argument that the penalty was excessive. There has been no showing that the Carrier's action was arbitrary or discriminatory. i

 While the circ.ma tances here make a strong case for leniency,
 leniency as such is not within the purview of this Board, and mitigation _
 is not justified for the reasons above indicated.
 i
 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole
 record and all the evidence, finds and holds:
 v
 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

        The dismissal of Claimant was s justified "5",


                      A W A R D _';~


        .:~_ ~.::I

        Claim denied.

                                                          i

                                      J J E BERT

                          '~

                          I

                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: s~ !~
 Executive Secretary f

                                                      i


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of November 1977.' .'

                                                          i

                                                          I