(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

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

 (1) The suspension of thirty (30) days imposed upon Trackman D. G. Johnson was unwarranted and on the basis of unproven and disproven charges LSystem File C-4(13)-DGJ/12-39(77-27)J/.

 (2) The claimant's record shall be cleared of the charge placed against him and he shall be reimbursed for all wage loss suffered."

 OPINION OF BOARD: The Claimant was charged with a violation of Rule 18,
 which prohibits various acts of disloyalty, dishonesty, desertion, intemperance, immorality, vicious and uncivil conduct, insubordination, etc.

 The Claimant was removed from service pending an investigation. As a result of the evidence developed at that hearing, the Claimant was suspended for thirty (30) days (including the time held out of service pending formal investigation).

 The charges stemmed from certain of Claimant's conduct on August 17, 1977. After the Foreman had cautioned him that he was not properly performing his normal work activities, the Claimant left the work area - presumedly to use the rest room - and he did not return for a lengthy period of time. Shortly thereafter, he took another break, and when the Foreman advised him to return to his duties, harsh language erupted and the Foreman's ability to instruct the Claimant in the performance of his duty wa's questioned by the Employe in rather strong terms. This was followed by an assertion that the Claimant made certain physical gestures with a shovel as he stated that he would perform physical violence upon the Foreman with that tool. Further unfortunate language ensued when the Foreman instructed the Claimant that he would be taken to the office.

 Other individuals in the immediate area were unable to positively corroborate the testimony of either the Foreman or the Claimant,-and although the Claimant denied that he threatened the Supervisor with the shovel, he admitted that he was angry and that it is possible that a


threatening motion could have been made.

 Once again, we are confronted with a sharp credibility conflict between a Foreman and an employe. As has often been repeated by this Board, it is not incumbent upon us to resolve credibility issues, inasmuch as we are not present at the hearing to observe the witnesses as testimony and evidence was presented.

 We are of the view that there is a sufficiency of evidence of record from which the company could have concluded that the Claimant was an aggressor in this matter and, accordingly, we are disinclined to set aside the finding of guilt.

 Nothing has been presented which suggests to us that the Carrier was arbitrary or capricious in assessing a thirty (30) day suspension in a case such as this
        FILINGS: 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: ge'~
 Executive Secretary

        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of August 1980.