( Express and Station Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood

(1) The Carrier violated the Rules of the Effective ClerkTelegrapher Agreement when, following inves 1976, it arbitrarily and capriciously suspended Mr. George W. Rlug from service, and

 (2) Carrier, because of such wrongful action, shall clear the service record of Mr. R:lug in connection with discipline assessed and compensate him for all wage losses suffered during the period September 2, 1976 to September 14, 1976, a total of seven (7) work-days.

 OPINION OF BOARD: On August 3, 1976, the Carrier advised the
 Claimant to attend an investigation concerning an allegation that he had failed to protect his assignment on July 28, 1976, an which date he had falsely claimed sickness.

 Subsequent to the investigation, Carrier notified the Employe that he was assessed five (5) actual days suspension. Immediately thereafter, the Carrier amended the imposition of discipline to show seven (7) days susp "overhead suspension" which was activated by the incident here under review.

 The record demonstrates that on the day in question, Carrier Officials received information from an undisclosed source that the Claimant would possibly be in attendance at a local race track that day. When the Official learned that the Claimant was absent from work, he and another Supervisor arranged to go to the race track to investigate. They testified that they-clearly observed the Claimant at close range' even though the Claimant
 Award Number 22766
 Docket Number CL-22770

 Page 2

 categorically denied that he was present at the race track on the day in question. In addition, the Employe presented certain signed statements from others indicating tha stated time.

 The Claimant was afforded an opportunity to present a medical certification from the physician, however he declined to do so.

 This case presents a classic credibility dispute, and we are asked to disturb the Hearing Officer's findings in that regard.

 There is ample evidence of record to support the Hearing Officer's conclusions, and it is clear that the individuals who testified against the Claimant were sufficiently familiar with him so as to avoid a case of mistaken identity
Accordingly, we will deny the claim.

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 jurisdictic over the dispute involved herein; and

 That the Agreement was not violated.

 A W A R D
Claim denied.

 ATTEST:

NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

By Order of Third Division


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 29th day of February 1980.