(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company
 ( (Monon Railroad)

 STATMQWT OF CEA24: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The discipline of Foreman Gaylord Spires was without just and sufficient cause and wholly disproportionate to the offense with which charged (3ystem File Claim No. 7/D-107030 E-306-1T).












OPINION OF HOARD: Claimant had been in the service of the Carrier since
 Jume, 1968. He vas promoted to Formmut on January 12, 1975.
 On December 21, 1977, he was notified by the Assistant Roadmaster:

                    Docket Humber MW-23145


        "Investigation of these charges will be held in Room 306, Union Station. Louisville, fir, on Friday, December 30, 1977, at 10:00 AM. Please arrange to be present with your representative, if yon desire one, and any witnesses you may wish to call who nay have information pertinent to this incident."


Me investigation was postponed by agreement and was conducted on February 17, 1978. A copy of the transcript of the investigation has been made a part of the record. On February 24, 1978, claimant was notified of his dismissal from the service.

 On October 24, 1978, agreement vas reached between the Carrier's highest designated officer of appeals and the General Chairman of the organization that the claimant would be restored to service as laborer with the understanding:

        "It being further agreed that your Organization reserves the right to hale claim with the IMIAB for restoration of Mr. Spires seniority above that of a laborer, the difference in ra`.e between that of a Laborer and a Foreman from '-.he date he returns to work until decision is rendered on claim by NRAH, and additional expenses he may incur an a result of not being able to hold a fob at Bedford, Tmdlana, which was his assigned headquarters point when he was dismissed as a Foreman."


The Orgrsnizat'ion contends that on December 14, 1977, the claimant vas instructed to report to the site of a derailment and remained on duty 37 hours.

 From a review of the transcript of the investigation, it seems that there map not have been a complete understanding between the claimant and the Assistant Roedmaster as to just what was expected of claimant during the night of December 159 1977. The claimant contends that he told the Assistant Boadmaster that two men would be required and the Assistant Roadmaster said oily one man w
                    Award Humber 232.U Page 3

                    Docket Aumber bbl-23146


Based on the entire records the Board concludes that claisnat did not meet his responsibility as a foreman; hoxever, under the circus stances involved, the offense did not justify the discipline isposed. We will sward that claimant be restored to his former seniority as a forman. In all other respects the claim will be denied.

        FI1®IFGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board., upon the vhole record and all the evidence, finds e01 holds;


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Rmployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Esployes within the meaaing of the Railway Labor Acts as approved June 21., 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the discipline imposed vas excessive.


                    A V A R D


        Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.


                          NATIONAL RAID ADJUSTM'T BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


        ATTEST: /~` Ex~cutive Secretary


        Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of January 1981.