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

 SUT04MT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The discipline imposed upon Foreman T. J. Barkley 'for not picking up material at work site on January 31, 1979' eras without Just and sufficient cause, on the basis of unprovea and disproven charges and in violation of the Agreement (system File B-1642).

 (2) Foreman T. J. Barkley shall be afforded the remedy prescribed in Article l.l, Rule 91(4) (6)."

 OPINION OF BOARD: The Cl=ient was instructed to report to an investigation
 to develop fasts concerning his dismissal from service
 for allegedly failing to perform certain work as directed in violation of
 rules which prohibit negligence, indifference, insubordination, dishonesty,
 etc.

 Subsequent to the investigation, the Carrier confirmed that the Employs was guilty, however, ultimately, his termination frat service was reduced to a suspension, and he was restored to service after an absence of approximately 90 days.

 The Claimant asserts that he was removed from service on the day in question fox allegedly failing to remove 9 scrap track spikes frost the work site, although the Carrier contends that the removal from service was four a broader spectrum of activities.

 Oar review of the record shows that the Carrier sought to take action against this Employs based upon his activity on January 31, 1979, and we rind there was a basis for said action, inasmuch as the Employs failed to see to his performance of duties in a proper manner. However, we will. concede that the investigation sought to extend matters far beyond the charges properly served, and the investigation attempted to explore many areas not material to the investigation.


ihider all the circmmstancesp we feel that a 90 day suspension was e:cessivej, and we will only approve a 30 day suspension.

        fM111GS: 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 Paployes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Enployes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Acts an approved Jane 21,9 1934;

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

        That the discipline was excessive.


                      A W A R D


        Claim sustained in accordance with the Opinion.


                        KATIORAL Rs n.xnsn ADJUS24M BOARD

                        By order of Third Division

ATTEST: go. IA~ ftm
        Executive 9e


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