(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:


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

(1) The dismissal of Equipment Mechanics B. E. Hood and J. L. Wright was unreasonable, arbitrary and without just and sufficient cause (System File B-1232).

(2) The claimants shall now be allowed the benefits prescribed in Agreement Rule 9(c)."

OPINION OF BOARD: This claim involves an alleged altercation between
Division Engineer B. M. Lutzenberger and Messrs. B. E. Hood and J. L. Wright, the claimants, both employed as Traveling Maintenance of Equipment Mechanics, on the evening of October 4, 1978.

Both claimants were charged with violation of Rule 175 and the first paragraph of Rule 176 of Carrier's Rules for the Maintenance of Way and Structures, and were dismissed from service on October 7, 1978. Formal investigation was held on November 2, 1978. A copy of the transcript of the hearing was made a part of the record.









The record clearly shows that an altercation occurred on October 4, 1978, in the restaurant of the Pine Forest Motor Lodge and in the parking lot between Division Engineer Lutzenberger and the claimants.

The testimony of both claimants confirmed the altercation and their part in it. Carrier witnesses also confirmed claimants' involvment in the altercation, their use of vulgar and profane language as well as threatening Lutzenberger verbally and with a wooden stick or club one inch in diameter and 24 inches long . The Hoard finds the evidence produced at the investigation stows claimants were in violation of Carrier's Rules 175 and 176.

Claimants contend the altercation was provoked by Lutzenberger. If claimants' contentions were correct they failed to conduct themselves in accordance with provisions of the last sentence of Rule 175, quoted above, end it is too late now for retribution.

The record shows claimants were reinstated on May 21, 1979, without back pay with the right of the Organization to press this claim.

The Hoard finds that the record contains sufficient probative, credible and competent evidence to support the Carrier's action. There is no.proper basis for the Hoard to interfere with the discipline imposed.





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 Hoard has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and









                      By Order of Third Division


ATTEST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 28th day of October 1980.