(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company

 STATEMENT OF CLALM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that.-

 (1) The dismissal of Trackman T. V. Gould was without just and sufficient cause and was arbitrarily imposed (System File B-1721).

 (2) Traclman T. V. Gould shall be afforded the remedy prescribed in Article 11 Rule 91(6)."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Trackman T. V. Gould, claimant in this case, was dis
 missed from service for failure to report to work at
 the conclusion of a disciplinary suspension on May 16, 1978, for use of
 profane language so a supervisor, and for insubordination. A hearing into
 the matter was held on June 26, 1978. As a result of that hearing, Carrier
 concluded that claimant had violated three Carrier rules: Rule 189, Rule 175,
 and Rule 176.

 Rule 189 states that employes must not absent themselves from their duties without proper authority. Rule 175 states that profane or vulgar language is forbidden. Rule 176 states that employes who are insubordinate, quarrelsome, or insolent will not be retained in service.

 The stenographic notes of the June 26, 1978, hearing have been
 made a part of the record of this case. A review of those notes reveals
 that claimant was not denied any of his substantive procedural rights,
 that he was afforded a full and fair hearing, and that he was given every
 opportunity by the hearing officer to examine and cross-examine witnesses
 and to make statements on his own behalf. At one point in the record,
 claimant contended that he had been dismissed by Carrier because he thought
 that he was being discriminated against because of his religion (Catholic)
 and his relatives.
 v
 This Board has carefully examined the record of this case and cannot discover any facts to support such an allegation. We see no indication that claimant's religion or his relatives in any way hive been an element in this case. Such a claim by claimant is unsubstantiated and has no merit.

I

          The facts of this case are basic. The record reveals that claimant knew when he was required to report to work. He knew that his suspension was over on May 16, 1978. He had a letter to that effect and the Railroad Retirement Board notified him about the end of his suspension. He did not report to work until May 25, 1978. This is a violation of Rule 189. It is also a fact that claimant used foul and vulgar

          language to the Roadmaster. This is a violation of Rules 175 and 176. Shoptalk is one thing, but a foul statement to a supervisor in front of other employes is another. Despite disagreements between employes and supervisors, there is no excuse for


          This Board has carefully reviewed the record of this case. It can see no reason why the actions of Carrier should not be upheld. Claimant did violate the rules as charged. He has a very poor work record. He is an argumentative and difficult employe. Carrier is not required to keep such an employe in its service.


I
                  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 15th day of August 1980.