Paul C. 0arter, Referee


(Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company

              STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signal


On behalf of Mr. L. L. Winsl~tt, who was dismissed from service for allegedly being insubordinate on January 16 and 17, 1979."

 ((brrier file: 1114-293 WI lhae: it::_1-1t0~

 OPINION OF BOARD: The recorl shows tint the claimfLnt entered Carrier'f: service
 as a signal helper on January 213, 1974, and was advanced to
 the position of Leading Signalman/Leading Maintainer on February 4, 1977. At
 the time of the occurrence giving rise to the dispu x herein, claimant was as
 signed to work as Leading Maintainer oz Carrier's Ivanhoe District, from 3:30 P.M.
 to 11:00 P.M., Monday through Friday.

        On January 30, 1979, claimant was notified by the Signal Supervisor:


        "Pursuant to Rule 58 of the :urrent ogre&aent between the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen follows:


            'Insubordination in your failure to clean snow from pipeline at Ivanhoe interlocking as instructed by Supervic:ory Signal Maintainer R. L. Buttles on Tuesday, January 16, 1379, and as directed to do so by S_gnal Supervisor K. P. Elliott on Wednesday, January 17, 1979 '


        In accordance with Rule 58 :)f the current agreement between the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen and this Company, an investigation on the above charge will be held at 2:45 P.M., Thursday, February 8, 1979, in the Conference Room on the Second Floor of the Annex Biilding, Kirk Yard, Gary, Indiana. Should you desire representatives and witnesses in your behalf as set forth in our current agreement, please arrange for same."

                    Award mnber 235o8 Page 2

                    Docket Ntraber SO-23961


By agreement, the investigation was postponed and conducted on February 15, 1979. A copy of the transcript of the investigation has been made a part of the record.

 The instructions referred to in the letter of charge had to do with snow rewval from pipeline leading to the interlocking plant.

 There was substantial evidence adduced at the investigation to show that claimant devoted very little, if any, time to snow removal from the pipeline. It was also devel tt,e pipeline to the exten': possible.

 In the handling of the dispute on the property Lt was also brought oi~t that claimant's prior work record was not good.

 Claimant's actions in the cese for which charged on January 30, 1979, coupled with his prior service record, justified the discipline that was imposed.

        FINDIMS: The Third Divis:.on of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all '.he evidence, finds and holds:


        That the partier; waived oral. hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier ind Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved Juie 21, 1934;

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

        That the ngreem,mt was not violated. !,~ CSI ~i~-.:


                                        i/

                          A W A R D _


        Claim denied.

                                                  6~

                                          .tea Cfiice ~~,


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD AaMT~fEF£6ARb

                            By Order of Third Division


                v ~f

        aw 14.1

A'-'MST:
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinoda, this 29th day of January 19~P.