(Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and
 ( Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers,
 ( Express and Station Employes
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company

1. Carrier acted arbitrarily, capriciously and in a harsh and discriminatory manner when on August 8, 1978, it dismissed Clerk William Swain, Sr., following an investigation held on August 2, 1978, such action being violative of the current Agreement dated January 1, 1975.





OPINION OF BOARD: Claimant had about five years of service with the Carrier
 at the time of the occurrence giving rise to the dispute
 herein. On July 19, 1978, he was instructed to attend an investigation on
 July 26, 1978, on the charge: ,_

The investigation scheduled for July 26 was postponed and conducted on August 2, 1978. On August 8, 1978, claimant was notified of-his dismissal from the service. A copy of the transcript of the investigation has been made a part of the record. A review of the transcript shows that none of claimant's substantive procedural rights was violated.
                    Docket Number CL-22924


The record shows that on Wednesday, July 12, 1978, claimant was completing his regular third shift assignment as Piggyback Clerk at Carrier's Tilford Ramp, Atlanta, Georgia, when the first shift crew clerk position became vacant. Claimant was the only qualified available employe and he was called by the Chief Train Clerk to protect the assignment. When questioned as to claimant's response, the Chief Train Clerk stated:

        "Q. Could you give us any information that you have in connection with his apparent failure to p date?


        "A. I called him and told him that he was going to have to protect it. He informed me that he had his wife's car and that he had to take it home to her and he couldn't work and I told him that he was the only man I had and he'd have to take that up with the agent on duty."


        The Office Trainmaster testified in part:


    "Mr. Swain (claimant) called me and told me that he had been called for the job, that he couldn't stay because he had to take his wife's car home. So I told Mr. Swain that was fine I would wait in the call office for him to take his wife's car home and come back and he said he could not do that. I told Mr. Swain that he had been called for the job and that he was to protect it. Again he said he couldn't do it. I told Mr. Swain I had no other choice, that I would have to hold him out of service pending an investigation


All employes have an obligation to comply with instructions of their superiors, unless a real safety hazard is involved, which was not in the case herein. Claimant should have complied with the instructions, and if he considered that his rights under the agreement ware being violated or that he was being improperly treated, he could have handled the matter through the grievance procedure. He could not be permitted to take matters into his own hands.

 There is no proper basis for the Board to interfere with the discipline imposed.
                    Award Number 22909 Page 3

                    Docket Number CL-22924


        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 not violated.


                      A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: Executive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 22nd day of July 1980.