(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company

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

 (1) The dismissal of Trackman Ray Johnson, Jr. was without just and sufficient cause and was wholly disproportionate to the offense with which charged LSystem File C-4 (13) - R1/12-39 (77-22) J/.

 (2) Claimant Johnson shall be returned to service with seniority and all other rights unimpaired and with compensation for all wages lost as a result of his dismissal."

On June 14 and 15, 1977, claimant did not report for duty at his regular starting time. Rule 17 (b) of the applicable agreement reads:

When claimant returned to work on June 16, 1977, he stated that he had had car trouble. He was told by the foreman that it would be necessary for him to secure a receipt for the repair work to his car or other suitable proof of his inability to report for work on the two previous days. On June 17 he again reported to work without proof of his inability to report on June 14 or 15 or to call his supervisor. On June 17 he was instructed to report to the Roadmaster's office, but did not do so. On June 23, 1977, he was notified by the Assistant Roadmaster:



      "you are therefore charged with violation of Rule 17-B of the current working agreement between Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company and the Brotherhood Maintenance of Way Employees, effective July 1, 1968, which reads as follows;


        'An employee desiring to be absent from service must obtain permission from his Foreman or the proper officer. In case an employee is unavoidably kept from work, he mist be able to furnish proof of his inability to notify his foreman or proper officer.'


      "You are also charged with a portion of Rule 18 of the Safety Rules for Engineering and Maintenance Employees which reads, 'Insubordination will subject the offender to dismissal.'


      "Mr. T. C. Herndon, Division Engineer, Tampa, Fla., will advise you of date, time and place your hearing will be held."


The investigation was scheduled for July 6, 1977, and postponed until July 8, 1977. Claimant was present at the investigation and was represented by an officer of the Organization. On July 18, 1977, claimant was dismissed from Carrier's service.

 A copy of the transcript of the investigation conducted on July 8, 1977, has been made a part of the record. A careful review of the transcript shows that none of claimant's substantive procedural rights was violated. There was substantial evidence adduced at the investigation in support of the charges against claimant. Also claimant's prior record with respect to absenteeism was far from satisfactory. He had been warned repeatedly concerning absenteeism and had previously been suspended from service on two occasions for the same offense.

 Based on the record before it, there is no proper basis for this Board to interfere with the discipline imposed, which was not arbitrary, capricious or in bad faith.

        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;

                      Award Number 22861 Page 3

                      Docket Number MW-22781


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 not violated.


                      A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:

              A'Mzi-

        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of May 1980.