Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employee PARTIES TO DISPUS:

STATE CF CLAIM: "Main of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The suspension of three (3) days imposed upon Machine Operator Ba. J. Clemons for alleged 'failure to protect your assignment without proper authority from August 14, 1978 to August 25, 1978, inclusive' vas without just and sufficient cause and on the basis of unproven and disprovnn charges (System File TRRA 1978-36).

 (2) Machine Operator Wk. J. Clemons shall be compensated for all wage loss suffered."

 OPINION OF BOARD: A hearing vas conducted to determine the facts and
 responsibility concerning the Claimant's asserted fail
 ure to protect his assignment from August 14, 1978 to August 25, 1978.

 Subsequent to the investigation, the Carrier found responsibility and assessed a 3 day suspension.

August 14, 1978, and when it became apparent that the Claimant was ill, he took the Claimant to the bus stop and agreed to advise the Foreman of the

Claimant's physical inability.

The Claimant stated that he visited the doctor the next day, and he then entered the hospital. The Claimant remained in the hospital until August 21, 1978, when he was released to resume work on August 22.


The Carrier claims that it did not receive any notification concerning Claimant's whereabouts until Claimant's wife on August 18, 1978, and that the Claimant did not return to duty on August 22= but rather, he reported on August 25, and at that time

he advised Carrier that he would return on August 28.


Riven were we to give the Claimant the benefit of all doubts the fact remains that he was obligated to take some specific action as of August 22, 1978. His failure to do so compels us to find that there was a basis for the disciplinary action, and certainly under the circumstances, the quantum of the p
          FI1mINGS: 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 Rmployes involved in this dispute are respectively Qxrrier and Faployes within the meaning of the Railway 16bOr 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.


                          DTATIOAAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMM BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: a4l, &w /eVsm
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 16th day of March 1981.