(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE:



On behalf of Signal Maintainer M. &. Mitchell, headquarters Ineaa Retarder Yard, Atlanta, Georgia, account being suspended far 90 daps because of an iavesti®ation held January 10, 1979, in Atlanta." (General Chairman file: SR-105. Carrier file: SG-376)

 OPINION OF BOARD: The claimant appeals from a ninety-day suspension
 resulting from tire charge that he was improper and negligent in the performance of his duties as third-shift signal maintainer on December 25, 1978. As the yard was down for approximately five hours.

 The evidence produced by the Carrier at the claimant's hearing was to the effect that four relays had been plugged into incorrect locations, and one relay was found to have a defective key which would permit it to enter its socket in a rotated position. It was rotated is its socket and, therefore, the contacts were not complete with the circuitry. When these problems were discovered and corrected, the automated switching system functioned properly.

 The claimant alleges that the Carrier had prejudged him guilty because the notice of his hearing ,included the following paragraph:

We do not believe that this admittedly strong language on the part of the charging officer established that the Carrier prejudged the guilt of the claimant. The cbarging officer was a witness but not the hearing officer, sad the decision was made and reviewed for the Carrier by persons other than the charging officer.


A review of the transcript of the record indicates that sufficient evidence vas produced to support a decision that the claimant had been adequately instructed in his duties and that he did not perform the duties adequately which vas the cause for the failure which kept the yard held up for approximately five hours.

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
 parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and, upon
 the vhele reed and all the evidence, finds and holds:

 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 ADJUS24ENT BOARD

                          By Order oaf Third Division


ATTEST:

        Executive Secretary


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